Student ID No: 660059712

SCS Summative Assignment

University of Exeter
04/01/2016

A Scheme of Work on Basic Electricity

Discussion under the Aspects of Differentiation, Motivation, Assessment and

Common Student Misconceptions
Student ID No: 660059712

The aim of the chosen sequence of lessons, taken from the Activate scheme
provided by Kerboodle, is to enable students to develop an understanding of the concepts of
electric charge, current, potential difference and resistance, as well as the basic laws
governing the behaviour of series and parallel circuits. It builds on the basic understanding
of electrical circuits, components and symbols students should have developed in Primary
School (DfE, 2013a).

The first lesson of the series introduces students to the concept of equal and
opposite electric charges and the forces resulting from their interaction, as well as the
existence of electrons as carriers of charge. The second lesson then introduces current as
the flow of charge/electrons and links it to the (pre-existing) concept of a circuit. Potential
difference is then introduced in lesson 3 as the amount of energy each charge receives from
the battery and hence carries through the circuit. Within the practical part of that lesson,
there is also the opportunity for students to extend their understanding by investigating the
relationship of current and potential difference in a circuit, leading to a qualitative
understanding of Ohm’s Law.

In lesson 4, students are introduced to more complex circuits, i.e. series and parallel
circuits, and investigate their behaviour with regards to current and potential difference
through/across multiple components. In lesson 5, the concept of resistance is introduced as
the ratio of potential difference and current, and linked to pre-existing ideas about
conductors and insulators. Lesson 6 is a revision lesson, allowing students to choose from
multiple pathways based on their current level of attainment.

The National Curriculum for KS3 specifies the following (DfE, 2013b):

With regards to static electricity, students should understand that positive and
negative charges can be separated by mechanical means (i.e. rubbing), and that charged
objects interact through forces. Furthermore, students should develop the concept of a
space-filling electric field as the medium of electrostatic attraction and repulsion.

1
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

As for circuit electricity, the National Curriculum specifies that students should
understand the concepts of current, potential difference and resistance as well as their
associated units Amperes, Volts and Ohms respectively. Furthermore, they need to have an
understanding of the behaviour of current in series and parallel circuits, link potential
difference to battery and bulb ratings, understand resistance as the ratio of potential
difference and current as well as a quantitative measure to distinguish between conductors
and insulators.

As one can see, the chosen scheme of work meets and partly exceeds these
requirements. Common student misconceptions associated with these specifications will be
subject to an in depth analysis at a later stage.

Appropriate differentiation

In producing lesson plans for delivering the scheme of work (see Appendix C for
example), I have identified three learning
objectives per lesson which are
differentiated using Bloom’s Taxonomy
(e.g. Krahtwohl, 2002) and assigned to the
levels developing, secure and extending
(see Appendix C). Following these levels, I
furthermore differentiated individual work
by providing alternative tasks, allowing
students to self-assess their level of
understanding using techniques such as
the fist-of-five and thereby determine the
task that provides the appropriate amount Fig.1: Visualization of Bloom’s revised taxonomy.
of challenge. The value of self-assessment From:http://www.learnnc.org/lp/media/misc/20
with regards to student progress will be 08/blooms_new.png
further discussed below.

In order to stretch and challenge the gifted and talented appropriately, the scheme
includes extension questions on all of its practical worksheets. To further increase the
density of opportunities outside of practical work, I frequently provided additional challenge
questions on the board which students could attempt once they had finished their regular
tasks. Another way of challenging higher ability students and supporting those who were
struggling was to vary the amount of scaffolding (see Appendix B) provided, a technique

2
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

which was specifically implemented when setting a homework task on series and parallel
circuits using student data as well as professional judgement.

The way in which the chosen scheme of work would be differentiated for SEN is
largely dependent of the type of SEN(s) present in a particular group. Since it is strongly
based on practical work, one would evidently have to ensure that students with physical
impairment have the opportunity to fully take part in the activities, i.e. that the equipment
and materials are barrier-free. Alternative/modified equipment and ways of recording work
might need to be considered. For students with mental disorders and/or learning
difficulties, a range of generic strategies might be beneficial, such as creating a multisensory
environment for students to be stimulated in a way most appropriate to their style of
learning, building on their strengths and special abilities to maintain motivation and
engagement, and allowing for different outcomes appropriate to the student’s level of
attainment. Some strategies beneficial to students with language difficulties are simplicity in
the language of instruction, explicitly explaining new words, avoiding unnecessary jargon
and linguistic complexity and instead using language familiar to the students when
explaining new concepts (National Curriculum Council, 1992). By comparison to literature on
EAL (for example Jarvis, 1991), one can see these strategies of language awareness benefit
students with EAL as well, and have in parts been implemented when delivering the chosen
scheme of work despite the absence of language-related SEN and EAL students as general
aspects of good practise.

The issue of motivation

Research shows that factors such as motivation and classroom climate have a
significant impact on attainment, which is expressed in the observation that ‘the cognitive
action of the learner depends on his/her motivational state’ (von Rhöneck et al., 1998). In
general, it is common to distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic
motivation is rooted in ‘internal’ factors such as interest an/or enjoyment associated with a
certain task, whiles extrinsic motivation relies on ‘external’ factors associated with the
outcome of a task or activity (Ryan and Deci, 2000). Although some researchers find this
dichotomy ‘misleading’ in an educational context (Krapp, 1999), it nevertheless allows to
make an important observation: Teachers can either affect their students’ motivation
through ‘extrinsic’ incentives such as rewards and sanctions i.e. in the forms of grades and
academic pressure, and/or by stimulating and developing their interest.

One factor that is often associated with sparking student interest, and thereby also
increasing motivation, is practical work. Not only the perceived consensus amongst

3
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

practitioners and official guidelines (house of commons ref), but also the large-scale study
TIMMS (REF) and several researchers (REFS) as well as the popularity of practical
approaches to teacher (REF) support this view. Others, such as Abrahams (2009) and
Hodson (1993) are more sceptical. As Abrahams points out, the terms ‘motivation’ and
‘interest’ are often confused in research or used interchangeably. He argues that, while
certainly effective in inducing what he calls ‘situational interest’, i.e. an interest that is
specifically associated with a certain activity or task and hence very temporary in nature,
practical work in itself does not necessarily increase students’ long term personal interest
and/or motivation to pursue the subject further (Abrahams, 2009). However, he also notes
that the benefits of ‘situational interest’ are improved behaviour and a positive impact on
the image of science as perceived by the students. This is links in with Wieman’s (2005)
finding that a research-based approach to learning, inevitably characterized by experimental
activities, can improve students’ beliefs about the subject itself, which in turn has a positive
effect on motivation.

The chosen scheme of work takes such an approach, at least with regards to circuit
electricity, which I found in practise to be beneficial with regards to motivation and also
behaviour, as pointed out by Abrahams(2009). However, from this experience, I support
Abraham’s and Millar’s (2008) view that practical work is much more effective in
investigating the behaviour of observables rather than understanding concepts.

The role of assessment

The discussion of assessment with regards to this scheme of work will be focussed
mainly on formative assessment (FA), i.e. assessment for learning (AfL), since it has a direct
and strong impact on pupil progress (Black and William, 1998; Black et al., 2003) and hence
the successful implementation of the chosen scheme of work. Formative assessment is
distinguished from summative assessment (SA) largely by the way in which the resulting
information is used. While the results obtained from SA can be used for a variety of
purposes such as collecting data about students, gauging the effectiveness of schools and
programmes, or holding teachers accountable for their students attainment (Garrison and
Ehringhaus, 2007), it does not immediately affect the education process itself (Taras, 2005).
Formative assessment, on the other hand, can only be classified as such if the information
obtained leads to feedback and hence affects that process (Taras, 2005).

Ofsted (2008) suggest that AfL techniques are used in every lesson, and throughout
my teaching practise I have adopted the practise of conducting activities aimed at AfL at the
beginning (starter) and end (plenary) of every lesson, as well as throughout the lesson if

4
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

appropriate. An example of an engaging starter that also allows for AfL would be student
modelling of a simple circuit at the start of lesson 4 using students as electrons and sweets
as units of energy. Following the demonstration, individual students were targeted and
asked to explain the analogy, which not only provides opportunities to assess knowledge
and provide verbal feedback, but also to address misconceptions effectively using the model
at hand.

In my lesson plans, I have identified a series of questions related to the learning

outcomes of each lesson, which are differentiated using Bloom’s Taxonomy (Bloom, 1956)
and were used for targeted questioning based on ability during each plenary. This not only
allows me to assess understanding in a differentiated way, but also gives students the
opportunity to verbalize their thoughts and receive personalized verbal feedback, which
links to to Alexander’s (2004) observations about the importance of spoken language in AfL.

Drawing on Black et al.’s (2001) findings about the benefits of self- and peer
assessment, I also set a homework task asking students to describe the readings on
voltmeters and ammeters in series and parallel circuits and state the corresponding circuit
laws at the end of lesson 4. The work produced was then peer assessed using an accessible
mark scheme, and students were given time to improve their work using the feedback
provided.

Common student misconceptions and how to approach them

Growing up in a world strongly influenced by science and technology, children come

into contact with scientific concepts from a very young age. They learn to use electrical
appliances, hear about the cost of electricity and the voltage provided by a battery, the
power and torque of a car engine and the risks associated with nuclear energy. Hence it is
only natural for them to develop ideas associated with these scientific terms long before
they commence formal education. These ‘naive’ ideas are referred to by researchers using
terms such as ‘misconceptions’, ‘preconceptions’, ‘alternative conceptions’ and ‘children’s
science’ (Gilbert and Watts, 1983). While most can be used equivalently, it is worth
distinguishing between preconceptions, to explicitly label those naive ideas that have been
developed outside of instruction through life-world experience, and misconceptions as a
more general term for scientifically incorrect or inaccurate ways of thinking that can emerge
at any point before, during or even after instruction.

Student misconceptions in science in general and electricity in particular have been

subject to a wide variety of research projects in many countries around the globe. Some
researchers such as Osborne have even specifically looked into how these findings about

5
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

misconceptions relate to each other. The notable (yet not necessarily surprising) results
were strong similarities between the observed pre- and misconceptions held by students
across geographical, linguistic and cultural boundaries (Osborne, 1983). The following
analysis hence assumes that student misconceptions in electricity are culturally agnostic in
nature, and consequently refers to a variety of studies conducted in various countries and
different times, since a lot of research has been conducted in the 1980s and 1990s that still
holds relevance today.

From a constructivist point of view, the occurrence of misconceptions appears natural and
to a certain degree unavoidable. Rather than the transfer of knowledge from teacher to
student, constructivism views learning as an active process of interaction with the
environment from which the learner ‘constructs’ his/her own knowledge (for further
explanation, see Appendix A). Consequently, the teacher’s role is a rather passive one, and
while provisions can be made to guide the learner in the process through appropriate
activities and sensory input, the process is ultimately out of his/her control. As Shuell (1987)
puts it, 'the teacher's task is the non-trivial one of determining which learning tasks are the
most appropriate for students to work on' (p. 245). Hence, it is evident that in order for
teaching to be effective, it must be informed by a profound knowledge not only of the
subject area and effective teaching strategies appropriate to the needs of a wide range of
learners, but also common pre- and misconceptions associated with the subject matter in
order to anticipate, diagnose and challenge them appropriately. Research shows that if they
remain unchallenged in instruction, misconceptions can be retained way beyond childhood
and even by those who enter sixth form to study Physics at A-level Physics and Physics
undergraduates (For an early review, see Gilbert and Watts, 1983).

Strategies for altering misconceptions, a process also known as conceptual change,

are described by Scott, Asoko and Driver (1991) and divided into two categories: Ones based
on the creation and resolution of cognitive conflict (for explanation, see Appendix A), and
ones based on extending the learners preconceptions for example through the use of
analogies and other forms of scaffolding (for explanation, see Appendix B). Both types are
used in the chosen scheme of work and will be discussed below.

Notably, the majority of research on misconceptions in electricity focuses on the concept of

current (Millar and Beh, 1993), and to a lesser extend potential difference and resistance.
However, this is consistent with my experience resulting from delivering the chosen scheme
of work, during which there were hardly any issues regarding static electricity and circuit
symbols, compared to the substantial difficulties some students were experiencing when
attempting to understand the concepts mentioned above, and also with Johnstone and
Mughol’s (1978) findings that circuit symbols (they do not mention static electricity) do not

6
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

pose significant difficulties to students at Secondary School level, yet common concepts of
circuit electricity such as potential difference and power do. The following discussion will
hence be focussed on student misconceptions involving current, potential difference and
resistance, as well as their
behaviour in series and parallel
circuits.

Current is by far the

dominant concept in research on
misconceptions in electricity
(Gilbert and Watts, 1983), and is
considered by Osborne (1983) to
be the ‘basic and important idea’
regarding electrical circuits, and a
‘pivotal’ concept by Preece (1976).
Fig 2: Student models of current according to Osborne (1984).
Consequently, researchers have
identified a wide range of pre- and misconceptions about current. Some, such as Osborne
(1983) and Shipstone (1984) have even gone as far as describing whole sets of scientifically
incorrect mental models that they have found to govern students’ thinking, each of which
holding different implications that complicate further learning. The four models identified
by Osborne (1983) are illustrated in Fig. 2. Model A assumes components to be ‘sinks’ of
current that ‘use up’ the current completely and only need to be connected to the battery
by a single lead. It can hence also be called a ‘unipolar’ model. Model B is known as the ‘bi-
directional’ or ‘clashing current’ model, which assumes that current flows out of the battery
from both poles and into the component, where again it is used up completely. In model C,
the unidirectional nature of current is acknowledged, yet the current is again assumed to be
dissipated by the components and hence decreasing throughout the circuit. Model D
represents the scientifically correct view of current being unidirectional and conserved.
Similar models were identified by Shipstone (1984), although he did not find the ‘unipolar’
model to be statistically relevant, yet in turn identified another unidirectional model
assumed by a significant number of students, in which a constant amount of current is
provided by the battery and ‘shared’ between components rather than conserved.

According to Gilbert and Watts (1983), an inquiry-based approach to teaching can

help to prevent the development of misconceptions with regards to the ‘dissipation’ of
current. This is consistent with the way in which current is introduced by the chosen scheme
of work, allowing students to investigate a simple battery-bulb monocircuit by means of an
ammeter. It might be suggested, however, that instead of swapping the ammeters position,

7
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

two ammeters should be used ‘before’ and ‘after’ the bulb, in order to negate the
‘dissipation’ of current even more explicitly.

Shipstone (1994) also identifies a particular way of thinking (or framework)

associated with his model II (Osborne’s model B), in which current through a component is
assumed to only be affected by what happens ‘before’ it (in a directional sense), and is
unaffected by what happens ‘after’ it. While he calls this the ‘sequence model’, other
authors also refer to it as the ‘time-dependent’ model (Shipstone, 1984). It represents a
highly localized view of current in an electric circuit, as opposed to the scientifically correct
global view of changes to individual components affecting the whole circuit.

Fig.3: Illustration of common misconceptions associated with current. From: Shipstone et al.
(1988)

The scheme of work makes explicit provisions to challenge ‘sequential reasoning’. In

lesson two and subsequent to conducting their practical work, students are intended to
watch a video in which, using the example of a torchlight, the speaker formulates the
misconception that a battery ‘produces’ a current which then starts flowing through the
circuit. The obviously false implication that it would hence take some time for the electrons
to ‘reach’ the bulb is then used to falsify this conception and introduce the scientifically
correct view of a ‘sea’ of electron present inside the wire that starts ‘drifting’ once a battery
is connected. This can be identified as a concrete example of an approach suggested by
Nussbaum and Novik (1982) aimed at ‘emulating’ constructivist accommodation (see
Appendix B) in the classroom in order for conceptual change to happen.

8
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

Now that the difficulties in helping students construct a scientifically correct view of
current are explained, it is worth noting that there have been some objections with regards
to the benefits of doing so. While it has already been mentioned above that current is
widely viewed as the fundamental concept of circuit electricity, it is also notable that many
students think about it in terms of properties more closely associated with the scientifically
correct view of electrical energy, which is very evident in the idea of the ‘dissipation’ of
current in components. While this is of course a misconception, Shipstone (1988), for
example, suggests that for the majority of students, such a view is sufficient for
understanding the technical benefits of electricity and the safety issues inherent to it’s use.
He hence suggests that energy, not current, should form the fundamental concept of basic
instruction in electricity. The chosen scheme of work obviously does not acknowledge this
view, and there are many practical (i.e. lack of measurability), conceptual (how is electrical
energy related to charge?) and curricular (one cannot understand many further aspects of
electricity, such as Ohm’s law, without understanding current) issues attached to it. Yet,
from practical experience in delivering the scheme of work, I can say that the concept of
energy is certainly helpful in relating their life-world experience with electricity to the
scientific picture.

With regards to potential difference, multiple researchers have found that the
concept is often confused (e.g. Millar and King, 1993) or at least a closely associated
(Rhoneck, 1981) with current, and one of the hardest concepts of basic electricity for
students to master (Duit and Rhöneck, 1997). One possible explanation for these difficulties
could be the absence of everyday experience involving potential difference (Liégeois et al.,
2003), which might be limited to battery and appliance specifications for many students.
Liégeois et al. (2003) further note that some students think of potential difference as a
property of current, and hence predict that there is no potential difference across an open
switch. Shipstone (1984) also observes that while from a scientific point of view, potential
difference results from an imbalance of charges which can in turn induce a current, (i.e. flow
of charge), many students instead adopt the contrary view of current as the origin of
potential difference.

To avoid this confusion, it has been suggested to introduce the concept of potential
difference much later in instruction (Millar and King, 1993), when the idea of current has
already been internalized and become part of the students’ physical intuition. The obvious
disadvantage of this approach, however, is that potential difference is a key concept for
understanding the Physics behind circuits and batteries, and that an instruction that omits
the concept of would hence not allow for an appropriate level of understanding.

9
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

A possible alternative might again be an inquiry-based approach, as already

considered with regards to current, that allows students to investigate scientific realities
such as the presence of potential difference even in the absence of current (by measuring
p.d. across a closed switch) while being guided by the teacher through appropriate
questions and research tasks. This is, in fact, the approach that the chosen scheme of work
takes. Current and potential difference, introduced in lesson 2 and 3 respectively, are both
investigated in the context of practical work and by means of a simple battery-switch-bulb
monocircuit, allowing for the students to test their predictions while being guided by the
questions on their practical sheets.

When it comes to the more complex series and parallel circuits introduced in
lesson 4, understanding is evidently strongly influenced by the (mis-)conceptions the
student has developed during previous instructions or preconceptions that have been
carried over. As an example, it is obvious that a student’s predictions about ammeter
readings in a series circuit will depend on how he/she thinks about current, i.e. the ‘model’
they apply and the misconceptions they harbour.

With regards to series circuits, misconceptions resulting from ‘sequential reasoning’

and the idea that current is ‘dissipated’ appear to be of particular importance, since they
logically contradict the facts that for example adding a bulb to a series of bulbs changes the
brightness of all bulbs (rather than only those ‘downstream’), and that identical lamps
arranged in series have the same brightness, respectively. Misconceptions that seem to
undermine scientifically accurate predictions about parallel circuits in particular are ‘local
reasoning’ (Duit and Rhöneck, 1997), more specifically the idea of the battery as a constant
current source which is independent of changes to the rest of the circuit (i.e. the number of
branches), and the analogous treatment/confusion of current and potential difference,
resulting for example in the idea that potential difference is ‘split up‘ by branches in a
circuit. My experience in delivering this scheme of work strongly confirms the persistence of
those latter difficulties, as well as Millar and Beh’s (1993) and Millar and King’s (1993)
observation that making predictions about voltmeter readings in complex circuits are a
source of enormous difficulty for students.

Furthermore, they make the rather philosophical statement that the ability to
predict voltmeter readings in complex circuits should not be treated as evidence for a
particular understanding of potential difference among students, but rather as part of a
wider understanding of the concept itself. This is consistent with my observation in teaching
practise that some students were able to explain the concept of potential difference in a
scientifically correct way but failed to make correct predictions (as evidenced by the
homework task they were given), and vice versa. The same was true for current. When
marking the homework, I also noticed that a significantly larger number of students were

10
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

able to define current correctly and make predictions about ammeter readings, than was
the case for potential difference and voltmeter readings.

As a strategy for teaching with regard to these difficulties, Millar and Beh (1993)
suggest introducing simple parallel circuits before introducing series circuits, pointing out
the fact that they can be viewed as nested monocircuits. In order to reap the full
instructional benefit of this approach, however, they stress that it has to be made explicit to
the students in order to enable them to transfer their knowledge about monocircuits to the
new situation. They also claim that it is important to explicitly state basic facts about parallel
circuits, such as that potential differences measured across parallel components should be
equal.

Millar and King (1993) particularly

stress the importance of ‘global reasoning’
for students’ understanding of potential
difference in complex circuits, and argue that
the global effects of manipulating a circuit
should be made an explicit objective in
instruction. This view, also expressed by
Härtel (1982), is consistent with the remarks
about the misconceptions associated with
‘local reasoning’ made above in the
discussion on current. While emphasizing the
importance of letting the students ‘discover’ Fig.4: Diagram illustrating a parallel circuit as
the circuit laws through practical work, Millar nested monocircuits, available on the Activate
and King (1993) also make the claim that scheme.
focus should be laid on qualitative, rather than quantitative analysis.

In the chosen scheme of work, not all yet some of these recommendations find
application. Series and parallel circuits are introduced simultaneously and in an inquiry-
based context, as suggested by Millar and King (1993). Fig. X also shows a picture taken from
the resources associated with the scheme of work, which I used in my delivery and which
explicitly illustrates parallel circuits as ‘nested monocircuits’. Furthermore, while students
are asked to make calculations in order to discover the addition rules for current and
potential difference, the emphasis lies on a qualitative understanding of circuit laws.

With regards to the resistance concept, one notes that there is a lot less research on
misconceptions associated with it than with regards to more prominent concepts such as
currenct and potential difference. According to Viard and Khantine-Langlois (2001), this is
due to the notion that resistance is a concept acquired solely through instruction, and is

11
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

hence ‘unspoiled’ by preconceived alternative conceptions (e.g. Johnstone and Mughol,

1978). While that might be the case, Viard and Khantine-Langlois (2001) further argue that
while students may not harbour significant preconceptions with regards to electrical
resistance, the common sense notions associated with the word itself certainly have the
potential to create difficulties in developing a scientifically accurate understanding. As a
solution, they suggest to introduce the concept in the context of conducting and insulating
materials, and instead of ‘resistance’ to talk about ‘conductance’, which as a term is less
‘contaminated’ with common sense notions, yet still relates to the scientifically correct
concept of conductivity, i.e. the reciprocal of resistance. Johnstone and Mughol (1978)
suggest the same, although they also point out the potential benefits of omitting the
concept of resistance altogether in lower Secondary School, while Viard and Khantine-
Langlois maintain that resistance is ‘of fundamental importance in basic courses of electrical
circuit theory’ (Viard and Khantine-Langlois, 2001, p. 268).

In lesson 5 of the chosen scheme of work (see Appendix B), resistance is introduced
by explicitly relating to those common sense notions associated with the word that Viard
and Khantine-Langlois (2001) discussed, which can be seen as an opportunity to explicitly
formulate these notions for in order to contrast them with the scientific concept of electrical
resistance. Contrary to Viard and Khantine-Langlois’s (2001) suggestions however, the
concept of electrical resistance is then introduced empirically by means of a practical on
resistance in a wire, rather than as ‘conductance’ and by contrasting conductors and
insulators. The students’ prior phenomenological knowledge about conductors and
insulators is then related to the concept of resistance at the end of the lesson. With regards
to the research at hand, the structure of this lesson should certainly be modified in the light
of the suggestions made by Viard and Khantine-Langlois’s (2001) and Johnstone and Mughol
(1978).

Additionally, one notes that while allowing students to investigate resistance as the
ratio between potential
difference and current,
conducting a practical in
itself does not help to build a
conceptual understanding of
what happens on a
microscopic scale. A specific
solution to this problem of
visualizing the rather
abstract concept of
resistance has been very Fig.5: Illustration of a kinaesthetic model of resistance,
available on the Activate scheme.
12
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

recently suggested by Cottle and Marshall (2016) in the form of a kinaesthetic model.
Modelling resistance according to the Drude model of free electrons using laboratory
masses as ions and marbles as electrons, they claim, enables students not only to construct
a mental image of resistance, but also to make specific predictions on the effects on cross-
sectional area and wire length. While there is no need to go into detail with regards to
cross-sectional area at this stage, wire length is a specific aspect of lesson 5 in the chosen
scheme of work. This makes sense since a more profound understanding on the microscopic
causes of resistance should lead to an appreciation of the fact that resistance is a global
characteristic of circuits, present in all components and even wires, rather than a property
of particular components, i.e. resistors, a misconception also identified by Viard and
Khantine-Langlois (2001).

While it does not incorporate the actual kinaesthetic model, the scheme of work
provides a resource in the form of a diagram (Fig.X) which serves a similar purpose of
creating understanding through analogy. Delivering the scheme of work, I made extensive
use of this diagram in the context of a class discussion.

Regarding the dichotomy of teaching strategies aimed at conceptual change

suggested by Scott, Asoko and Driver (1991), as discussed at the beginning of this section,
one can see that the approach for introducing resistance taken by the scheme of work is of
the second type. Instead of creating cognitive conflict, the concept of electrical resistance is
constructed by building on and extending the existing common sense preconceptions of
resistance through the use of an analogy.

In general, as Cottle and Marshall (2016) remark, the level of abstraction and lack of
visibility inherent to electricity and particularly circuit electricity poses a challenge to
students and can catalyze the emergence and persistence of misconceptions such as those
discussed above. Hence, it seems advisable to make extensive use of visual and kinaesthetic
modelling using analogies wherever possible, in particular since the practical work illustrates
circuit rules effectively yet fails to create instructive mental images. This is why, in my
practical delivery of the chosen scheme of work, I incorporated student modelling of a
simple monocircuit as an alternative starter to lesson 4, and repeated the same for series
and parallel as part of the plenary. Besides instructive visualization, these kinds of activities
appear to have the additional benefit of catering to the needs of kinaesthetic learners and
those students who struggle with a lack of movement during lessons.

While one might be tempted make excessive use of analogies in teaching practise,
there are also some more sceptical voices amongst researchers, claiming thehy ‘give birth to
as many monsters as healthy babies’ (Bunge, 1973, p. 127). Contrarily, Duit (1991)

13
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

concludes, after listing and discussing their advantages and disadvantages, that while all
analogies have shortcomings in the sense that they never fit exactly with the concepts they
are used to explain, they form an essential part of science education not only due to their
practical effectiveness, but also because they educate the user on what he calls ‘scientific
metaknowledge’ (Duit, 1991, p.668).

Summary, conclusion and targets

Reflecting on the learning outcomes of this assignment, I can confidently say that I
have gained a much better operational knowledge of the use of assessment, appropriate
differentiation, the effect of teaching strategies on motivation and most importantly,
student misconceptions and approaches to tackle them. While this knowledge will certainly
have a high practical value for my future teaching, I feel like an even greater benefit lies in
the creation of awareness regarding the effect of these aspects on student learning.
Although I have previously been familiar with common misconceptions in mechanics,
electricity and quantum mechanics, I was unaware of the wealth of relevant research on
these topics, most of which explicitly relates to teaching, and hence the sheer amount of
quality, evidence-based advice on effective teaching strategies.

Furthermore, while I have used AfL extensively since the beginning of my training, I
always regarded it merely as an element of good practise and an effective way of finding out
whether ‘the job was done’. I was unaware, however, of the strong empirical correlation
(REF) with student progress, and the particularly strong benefits of self- and peer
assessment. I believe that I have not exhausted this potential in my practise so far.
Consequently, research and professional inquiry on appropriate techniques and regular
incorporation in practise will become one of my targets for next term.

The same argument essentially applies with regards to motivation. Being aware of
the importance of motivation and the fact that, ‘the cognitive action of the learner depends
on his/her motivational state’ (von Rhöneck et al., 1998, p.552), I have naturally attempted
to make my lessons ‘motivating’. However, I could not differentiate in my thinking and
planning between ‘motivation’ and ‘interest’ , let alone ‘personal’ and ‘situational interest’.
In the process, I not only had to differentiate my concept of motivation, but also adjust my
beliefs about specific teaching strategies (i.e. practical work) and their impact on
motivation.

In conclusion, the strongest benefit of this assignment has been the creation of a
much stronger link between theory and practise, between research and strategy. I noticed
that particularly as a school-based trainee, one is confronted with so such an overwhelming

14
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

load of established routines, frameworks and approaches, as well a well-established

professional body carrying a wide variety of standards and beliefs with regards to ‘good
practise’, that it can become very difficult to effectively sort the wheat from the chaff. The
result can be the attempt to incorporate them all at the same time, often without exactly
knowing the benefits and the contexts in which they apply, which results in a kind of ‘cargo
cult teaching’ that is not necessarily very effective.

Since it allowed me to thoroughly investigate the theory and research behind some
of these aspects of teaching, I feel like I am now able to make a better connection between
the ‘whats’ and ‘whys’ of teaching, and have come one step close to establishing my own
idea of ‘good practise’.

15
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

References

Abrahams, I. (2009) ‘Does practical work really motivate? A study of the affective value of
practical work in secondary school science’, International Journal of Science Education,
31(17), pp. 2335–2353.

Abrahams, I. and Millar, R. (2008) ‘Does practical work really work? A study of the
effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science’,
International Journal of Science Education, 30(14), pp. 1945–1969.

Alexander, R.J. (2008) Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. 4th edn. United
Kingdom: Dialogos.

Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C.S., Marshall, B. and Wiliam, D. (2003) Assessment for learning:
Putting it into practice. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998) ‘Assessment and classroom learning’, Assessment in

Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), pp. 7–74.

Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (2010) ‘Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom
assessment’, Phi Delta Kappan, 92(1), pp. 81–90.

Bunge, M. (1972) Method model and matter. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Department for Education (DfE) (2013): The national curriculum in England. Key stages 1 and
2 framework document. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/425601/P
RIMARY_national_curriculum.pdf (Cited 03/01/17)

Department for Education (DfE) (2013): The national curriculum in England. Key stages 3 and
4 framework document. Available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/381754/S
ECONDARY_national_curriculum.pdf (Cited 03/01/17)

Duit, R. (1991) ‘On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science’, Science
Education, 75(6), pp. 649–672.

Duit, R. & Rhöneck, Cv. (1991) ‘Learning and understanding key concepts of electricity’ , In:
Tiberghien, A., Jossem, E.L. and Barojas, J. (1998) ‘Connecting Research in Physics Education
with Teacher Education’, The International Commission on Physics Education.

16
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

Garrison, C. & Ehringhaus, M. (2007). ‘Formative and summative assessments in the

Classroom’, Available at:
https://www.amle.org/BrowsebyTopic/WhatsNew/WNDet/TabId/270/ArtMID/888/ArticleI
D/286/Formative-and-Summative-Assessments-in-the-Classroom.aspx (Cited 27/12/16)

Gilbert, J.K. and Watts, D.M. (1983) ‘Concepts, misconceptions and alternative conceptions:
Changing perspectives in science education’, Studies in Science Education, 10(1), pp. 61–98.

Härtel, H. (1982) ‘The electric circuit as a system: A new approach’, European Journal of
Science Education, 4(1), pp. 45–55.

Hodson, D. (1993) ‘Re-thinking old ways: Towards A more critical approach to practical work
in school science’, Studies in Science Education, 22(1), pp. 85–142.

Jarvis, T. (1991) ‘Science and bilingual children: Realising the opportunities’, Education 3-13,
19(1), pp. 41–48.

Johnstone, A.H. and Mughol, A.R. (1978) ‘The concept of electrical resistance’, Physics
Education, 13(1), pp. 46–49.

Krapp, A. (1999) ‘Interest, motivation and learning: An educational-psychological

perspective’, European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14(1), pp. 23–40.

Krathwohl, D.R. (2002) ‘A revision of bloom’s Taxonomy: An overview’, Theory Into Practice,
41(4), pp. 212–218

Liégeois, L., ChasseigneG′erard, Papin, S. and Mullet, E. (2003) ‘Improving high school
students’ understanding of potential difference in simple electric circuits’, International
Journal of Science Education, 25(9), pp. 1129–1145.

Millar, R. and Beh, K.L. (1993) ‘Students’ understanding of voltage in simple parallel electric
circuits’, International Journal of Science Education, 15(4), pp. 351-361.

Millar, R.and King, T. (1993) ‘Students’ understanding of voltage in simple series electric
circuits’, International Journal of Science Educaion, 15(3), pp. 339-349

17
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

National Curriculum Council (1992): Teaching Science to Pupils with Special Educational
Needs, York: NCC

Nussbaum, J. and Novick, S. (1982) ‘Alternative frameworks, conceptual conflict and

accommodation: Toward a principled teaching strategy’, Instructional Science, 11(3), pp.
183–200.

Osborne, R. (1983) ‘Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current’, Research in
Science & Technological Education, 1(1), pp. 73–82.
Preece, P.F.W. (1976) ‘The concepts of electromagnetism: A study of the internal
representation of external structures;, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13(6), pp.
517-524.

von Rhöneck, C., Grob, K., Schnaitmann, G.W. and Völker, B. (1998) ‘Learning in basic
electricity: How do motivation, cognitive and classroom climate factors influence
achievement in physics?’, International Journal of Science Education, 20(5), pp. 551–565.

Millar, R. and King, T. (1993) ‘Students’ understanding of voltage in simple series electric
circuits’, International Journal of Science Education, 15(3), pp. 339–349.

Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000) ‘Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic
motivation, social development, and well-being’, American Psychologist, 55(1), pp. 68–78.

Taras, M. (2005) ‘ASSESSMENT – SUMMATIVE AND FORMATIVE – SOME THEORETICAL

REFLECTIONS’, British Journal of Educational Studies, 53(4), pp. 466–478.

The Office for Education Standarts (Ofsted) (2008) Assessment for learning: The impact of
National Strategy support. Available at: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/assessment-
for-learning-impact-of-national-strategy-support (Cited 27/12/16)

Scott, P. H. ,Asoko, H.M., Driver and R.H. (1991) ‘Teaching for conceptual change: A Review
of Strategies’, In: Tiberghien, A., Jossem, E.L. and Barojas, J. (1998) ‘Connecting Research in
Physics Education with Teacher Education’, The International Commission on Physics
Education.

Shipstone, D.M. (1984) ‘A study of children’s understanding of electricity in simple DC

circuits’, European Journal of Science Education, 6(2), pp. 185–198.

Shipstone, D. and Gunstone, R. (1985). ‘Teaching children to discriminate between current

18
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

and energy’, In: Duit, R., Jung, W. And von Rhöneck, C. (eds), Aspects of Understanding
Electricity (pp. 287-297). Kiel, IPN

Shipstone, D.M., Rhöneck, C. v., Jung, W., Kärrqvist, C., Dupin, J.., Johsua, S. and Licht, P.
(1988) ‘A study of students’ understanding of electricity in five European countries’,
International Journal of Science Education, 10(3), pp. 303–316.

Viard, J. & Khantine-Langlois, F. (2001) ‘The Concept of Electrical Resistance: How Cassirer's
Philosophy, and the Early Developments of Electric Circuit Theory, Allow a Better
Understanding of Students' Learning Difficulties’, F. Science & Education (2001), 10: 267.

Wieman, C. (2005) ‘Transforming physics education’, Physics Today, 58(11), pp. 36–41

19
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

Appendix A: How does the subject specific literature and course input on
theories of learning inform the scheme of work?

An understanding of the nature of learning and the underlying theories is crucial for
effective teachers. These theories allow us to gain insight into the psychological
mechanisms, i.e. the underlying chains of cause and effect that govern the learning process,
and thereby provide a solid framework to measure our practise against. In contrast to –for
example- the laws of Physics, however, it has to be noted that learning theories are not only
descriptive –i.e. explaining how learning works- but also prescriptive in nature, hence
stating what effective approaches to learning should look like. Different theories suggest
different ways of teaching to be most effective, and teachers can decide on their approach
by considering factors such as the subject they are teaching, the average age and ability
level of the group, as well as the desired learning outcomes of an individual session or
activity. What is most important, however, is that this decision is made consciously and
based on a profound knowledge of the different at hand (Daniels, Launder and Porter,
2009).

The scheme of work that will be discussed here is an introductory sequence of

lessons on Electricity, taken from the Activate scheme provided by Kerboodle. It consists of
five lessons covering the topics of charge, electrostatic repulsion and attraction,
electrostatic fields, serial and parallel circuits, current, potential difference and resistance,
as well as one lesson dedicated to summary and revision.

The main theories that will be considered with regards to this scheme of work are
behaviourism, constructivism and social constructivism.

The term Behaviourism was coined by the American psychologist John B. Watson
around the turn of the 19th century, making it the oldest of the theories to be considered
here (Pritchard, 2005). Behaviourists view learning as successfully establishing a connection
between an external stimulus and a desired internal response. This can be achieved in two
ways: Through classical conditioning, as is most commonly illustrated using the example of
Pavlov’s dogs, and through operand conditioning, using positive and negative
reinforcement. (Pritchard, 2005) While classical conditioning describes linking natural
reflexes to outside stimuli through association and repetition, operand conditioning can be
used to reinforce a desired behaviour in a particular situation by rewarding it (positive
reinforcement), while at the same time discouraging undesired behaviours through
punishment. Pavlov (1955) certainly acknowledged the value of rewards in conditioning, yet

20
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

our understanding of operand conditioning and its use in teaching is most strongly
influenced by the work of B.F. Skinner. (Pritchard, 2005)

With regards to Science education, one can immediately see that behaviourist
approaches are not particularly suitable to understanding higher level concepts and
scientific theories, since they merely focus on stimuli and response, rather than the
intermediate cognitive structures linking them. However, particular aspects of behaviourist
theory such as the use of rewards can be effective in establishing and maintaining
appropriate classroom routines, as Elliot and Burse (1991) suggest. This can be applied in
particular with regards to the methodical aspects of Science, such as planning and drawing
accurately, collecting and representing data correctly, using equipment appropriately and
developing effective safety routines. More generally, rewards can also improve motivation
(Skinner, 1953), which links to the observation that a behaviourist approach can be effective
for low-achieving learners with a history of academic failure. (Pritchard, 2005)

One particular aspect of the chosen scheme of work that might lend itself well to a
behaviourist approach is practise of the appropriate use of circuit symbols. In this particular
case, it is not important to understand an abstract concept or develop complex cognitive
structures, but rather to intuitively and consistently associate a given element of a circuit
(stimulus) with the corresponding symbol (response). Hence, activities based on repetition
and rewards (for example through competitive games) might be useful to induce operand
conditioning.

Constructivism is both an epistemological viewpoint and theory of learning (Piaget

1967). Constructivists view learning as the result of the learner actively constructing
knowledge through interaction with the environment (Bee and Boyd, 2006), and negotiating
between new information and his/her pre-existing body of knowledge (Pritchard, 2005).
According to Piaget (1967), there are two distinct mechanisms that dominate this process:
While assimilation occurs when embedding new experience into a pre-existing cognitive
structure, accommodation refers to the altering of these structures to resolve a cognitive
conflict arising from logical or conceptual incompatibilities between pre-existing structures
and new experiences.

One very important aspect of science education that link in well with a constructivist
approach to learning is that of student misconceptions and preconceptions. Learners enter
the study of a new subject area not as a tabula rasa, but with an often wide range of
preconceived concepts and ideas. (Driver, 1981) These preconceptions are often
incompatible with the corresponding expert concepts of the discipline at hand, and hence
considered misconceptions, giving rise to a potential cognitive conflict. It is the teacher’s
responsibility to escalate this cognitive conflict and make it as explicit as possible in order

21
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

for the learners to actively challenge their misconceptions and hence for accommodation to
take place (Smith, diSessa and Rochelle, 1993). To stick with a constructivist approach,
however, it should not be attempted to instantaneously ‘replace’ misconceptions, but
rather to allow them to transform through a continuous interactive process that allows for
“relatively stable intermediate states of understanding” (Smith, diSessa and Rochelle, 1993).

One interesting example with regards to the chosen scheme of work is the approach
to understanding the concepts of current and potential difference. In everyday language, the
two are blurred into each other, and often properties of current are falsely assigned to pot.
difference and vice versa (Cohen, Eylon and Ganiel, 1983; Duit, Jung and von Rhoneck,
1985). In order to avoid unnecessary confusion, Sang et al. (2000) advice to separate both
concepts as much as possible both on the lesson time scale and with regards to content.
Contrarily, in a plenary activity that is part of the scheme of work at hand, students are
explicitly asked to discuss and verbalize the differences between the two concepts. This is a
good example of expert dissent with regards to dealing with misconceptions. While the first
approach tries to avoid misconceptions by separating the two concepts, the second
acknowledges that the concepts are already intertwined within the students’
preconceptions and therefore actively seeks to address these misconceptions through
dialogue.

The importance of language in this last example links nicely to the field of social
constructivism, which is dominated by the work of Vygotsky and Bruner (Pritchard, 2005).
While closely related to constructivism, as the name suggests, social constructivists consider
social interaction, as opposed to interaction with the environment, to be at the heart of the
learning process. A particular emphasis is put on language as a tool to help learners
construct new ideas through dialogue. Dialogue is seen as key activity of social constructivist
learning that should be stimulated and maintained by the teacher. (Pritchard, 2005). Besides
this, teaching itself, i.e. the interaction of the learner with a more knowledgeable other, is of
course a form of social interaction. It is here that concepts such as the zone of proximal
development (ZPD) and scaffolding emerge.

The ZPD can be seen as the level of understanding that is just above the learner’s
current level of understanding, in which he/she is able to operate confidently and
independently. Vygotsky (1978) argues that it is within this zone between what the learner
can already do independently and what he/she cannot do at all, that learning takes place. In
order for this to happen, i.e. for the learner to be able to operate within the ZPA, he/she has
to be guided and assisted by the teacher. This can happen for example through dialogue,
the provision of materials or through simplifying tasks, and is known as scaffolding.
Successful learning extends the zone of confidence towards the zone of proximal

22
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

development, which in turn extends the ZPA towards what the learner was priorly unable to
do.

There are numerous examples of scaffolding within the scheme of work. The scheme
makes extensive use of analogical models in order to help students to picture and think
about newly introduced concepts, until they have build sufficient cognitive resources and
structures to use them independently. Examples of these are the rope model for series
circuits and the water pipe/hosepipe models for current/resistance. With regards to
simplifying tasks, it can be noted that some of the practical sheets already include sensible
results tables, enabling the students to focus on conducting the experiment and accurately
collecting data. A good example of focus being laid on language for understanding is to be
found in the lesson on current and circuits, where the students are initially asked to think
about the differences and similarities between an electrical current and a current in the
ocean, thereby making use of language to create an analogy while at the same time
encouraging the students to explore about the limits of that analogy.

As we have seen from our considerations with regards to the scheme of work at
hand, it is an interplay of approaches based on different theories that shapes effective
teaching. Despite their prescriptive nature, and although some theories might naturally lend
themselves to a given subject, it is important to not view them as mutually exclusive or
contradictory. Rather, an effective teacher needs to acknowledge different theories’ ability
to describe certain types of learning and knowledge accurately, while failing to be useful
with regards to others; and remain flexible in consciously choosing the approach that is
most appropriate in any given learning situation.

23
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

References

Bee, H. and Boyd, D. (2006). The Developing Child. London: Allyn and Bacon.

Cohen, R., Eylon, B. and Ganiel, U. (1983). Difference and current in simple electric circuits: A
student of students’ concepts. American J. of Physics,Vol. 57 , No. 5, pp. 407-412.

Daniels, H. and Launder, H. And Porter, J., 2009. Educational Theories, Cultures and
Learning. A Critical Perspective. Oxon: Routledge.

Driver, R. (1981).. Pupils’ Alternative Frameworks in Science, International Journal of Science

Education, Vol. 3, No.1 , 93-101.

Duit, R., Jung W. and von Rhoneck, C. (1985). Aspects of Understanding Electricity:
Proceedings of an International Workshop. Kiel: Schmit und Klaunig

Sang, D., Hollins, M., Kibble, B., Millar, R., Osborne, J. and Solomon, J. (2000). Teaching
Secondary Physics. London: John Murray.

Pavlov, I.P. (1955). Selected Works. Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing House.

Piaget, J. (1978). Behaviour and Evolution. New York: Random House.

Pritchard, A. (2005). Ways of Learning: Learning Theories and Learning Styles in the
Classroom. 2nd Edition. London: David Fulton.

Skinner, B.F. (1953). Science and Human Behaviour. New York: Macmillan.

Smith, J.P., diSessa, A.A. and Rochelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions Reconceived: A

Constructivist Analysis of Knowledge in Transition, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol.
3, No. 2, pp. 115-163.

Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

24
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016
Appendix B: Scheme of Work on Electricity (Activate, Kerboodle)

25
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

26
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

27
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

28
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

29
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

30
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

Appendix C: An example of a lesson plan

KTSA Lesson Plan

Date: 1 Teacher: Samuel Teaching Assistants: -
Wilks
04/11/16

Key Stage: 3 Year Group: 8 Class L

Subject: Resources: Standards - Targets

Science S4,S5, S2,S6,S1,S3

 P 2.1 charging up supporting

presentation
 Activity sheet: charging up
 Practical: Charging up
 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1c
61Q7qU-s

Male: Female: Total no SEN: G&T: EAL/Pupil

of pupils: (Initials only) (Initials only)
Premium (Initials only)

13 14 27 IJsdasdasd dsdasds sdasdasd

Other information about the group: (This bit next term when you know more about group

31
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

targets)

Learning Objectives Differentiation

 Describe what is meant by an electric field  Developing

 Describe how charged objects interact  Secure
 Explain how an object becomes charged  Extending

Key Questions + 1 mastery Question ( How do you know?... What if I changed ….Explain how you did that… How are these
different/the same etc
 What do we mean by an electric field?
 What creates an electric field?
 How do charged objects interact? How does their behaviour depend on their charge?
 Which charge are the ones that can move around?
 How does an object become charged?
 How would we have to draw the field lines if we wanted them to indicate the force that would be
exerted on a positively charged object? (Mastery)

Introduction:

Starter : Brainstorm on key words/things the students know about electric charge. Use whiteboards. (5 min)

Intro: Title, date, Los, register (5 min)

32
 Student ID No: 660059712
SCS Summative Assignment
University of Exeter
04/01/2016

Development/ Whole class independent work

Presentation: - all matter consists of atoms

- Atoms have positive core (protons) and negative shell (electrons)

- Like charges repel, unlike charges attract
- Non-contact force between charged objects => electric field (10 min)
Activity: Demonstrations on charged balloons. Students write observations on activity sheet. (10 min)

Presentation: - watch 1,5 min of youtube clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1c61Q7qU-s

electrons can be move freely -> charge carriers

- charging an object and distribution of charge carriers (10 min)

Activity: Students work on questions on activity sheet. (10 min)

Plenary:

Whiteboard quiz: Repel or attract?/Draw direction. (5 min)

Targeted questioning: Key questions (5 min)

33