Argument structure in explaining wave-particle duality of photons in double-slit experiment: A study pre-service teachers’ written reports

Ismo T. Koponen; Karoliina Vuola; Maija Nousiainen

doi:10.31129/LUMAT.12.3.2082

Authors

Ismo T. Koponen Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5304-315X
Karoliina Vuola Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4645-8626
Maija Nousiainen Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Finland https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3737-9918

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.12.3.2082

Keywords:

photon, wave-particle duality, pre-service teachers, semantic networks, argument structure

Abstract

We analyze here how pre-service teachers explicate their views about the wave-particle duality of photons and what role it plays in their arguments supporting the quantum nature of light. The data for the analysis is provided by 12 written reports about the double-slit experiment with feeble light. The analysis is based on constructing semantic networks corresponding to pre-service teachers’ written texts. Contingency-like associative correlation between word-pairs is used to differentiate between word-pairs, where associations of two terms or words is systematic. Such associations indicate connections, which are significant for key term vocabularies in construction of inferences and arguments. Based on that information of the key vocabulary we then construct the structure of pre-service teachers’ argument for the nature of the photon and its wave-particle duality, in the form of directed argument graphs (DAGs). The results show that argument structures in four to six out of 12 cases meet the goals set for pre-service teacher education. In these cases, experimental aspects and wave-particle duality play an important role in the pre-service teachers’ argument and its structure.

References

Ayene, M., Krick, J., Damitie, B., Ingerman, A., & Thacker, B. (2019). A Holistic Picture of Physics Student Conceptions of Energy Quantization, the Photon Concept, and Light Quanta Interference. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(6), 1049–1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9906-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9906-y

Benzi, M., Estrada, E., & Klymko, C. (2013). Ranking hubs and authorities using matrix functions. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 438(5), 2447–2474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2012.10.022 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2012.10.022

Bhatta, V. S. (2021). Critique of Wave-Particle Duality of Single-Photons. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 52(4), 501–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-021-09564-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-021-09564-4

Bøe, M. V., & Viefers, S. (2023). Secondary and University Students’ Descriptions of Quantum Uncertainty and the Wave Nature of Quantum Particles. Science & Education, 32(2), 297–326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00297-w DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00297-w

Bonett, D. G., & Price, R. M. (2007). Statistical Inference for Generalized Yule Coefficients in 2 × 2 Contingency Tables. Sociological Methods & Research, 35(3), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124106292358 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124106292358

Bouchée, T., de Putter - Smits, L., Thurlings, M., & Pepin, B. (2022). Towards a better understanding of conceptual difficulties in introductory quantum physics courses. Studies in Science Education, 58(2), 183–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1963579 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2021.1963579

Brandom, R. (2009). Articulating Reasons: An Introduction to Inferentialism. Harvard University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvjghvz0

Brandom, R. B. (2010). Between Saying and Doing: Towards an Analytic Pragmatism. OUP Oxford.

Bungum, B., Bøe, M. V., & Henriksen, E. K. (2018). Quantum talk: How small-group discussions may enhance students’ understanding in quantum physics. Science Education, 102(4), 856–877. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21447 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21447

Cheong, Y. W., & Song, J. (2014). Different Levels of the Meaning of Wave-Particle Duality and a Suspensive Perspective on the Interpretation of Quantum Theory. Science & Education, 23(5), 1011–1030. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9633-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9633-2

Didiş, N., Eryılmaz, A., & Erkoç, Ş. (2014). Investigating students’ mental models about the quantization of light, energy, and angular momentum. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 10(2), 020127. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020127 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.10.020127

Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., & Kattmann, U. (2005). Towards science education research that is relevant for improving practice: The model of educational reconstruction. In Developing standards in research on science education (pp. 1–9).

Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin’s Argument Pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915–933. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20012

Estrada, E. (2012). The Structure of Complex Networks: Theory and Applications. OUP Oxford. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199591756.001.0001

Estrada, E., Hatano, N., & Benzi, M. (2012). The physics of communicability in complex networks. Physics Reports, 514(3), 89–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2012.01.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2012.01.006

Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Sodian, B., Hussmann, H., Pekrun, R., Neuhaus, B., Dorner, B., Pankofer, S., Fischer, M., Strijbos, J.-W., Heene, M., & Eberle, J. (2014). Scientific Reasoning and Argumentation: Advancing an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda in Education. Frontline Learning Research, 2(3), 28–45.

Henriksen, E. K., Angell, C., Vistnes, A. I., & Bungum, B. (2018). What Is Light? Science & Education, 27(1), 81–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9963-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-018-9963-1

Hentschel, K. (2018). Photons: The History and Mental Models of Light Quanta. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95252-9

Hobson, A. (2005). Electrons as field quanta: A better way to teach quantum physics in introductory general physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 73(7), 630–634. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1900097 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1900097

Koponen, I. T. (2020). Usage of Terms “Science” and “Scientific Knowledge” in Nature of Science (NOS): Do Their Lexicons in Different Accounts Indicate Shared Conceptions? Education Sciences, 10(9), Article 9. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10090252 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10090252

Koponen, I. T., & Nousiainen, M. (2018). Concept networks of students’ knowledge of relationships between physics concepts: Finding key concepts and their epistemic support. Applied Network Science, 3(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41109-018-0072-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41109-018-0072-5

Krijtenburg-Lewerissa, K., Pol, H. J., Brinkman, A., & van Joolingen, W. R. (2017). Insights into teaching quantum mechanics in secondary and lower undergraduate education. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 13(1), 010109. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.13.010109

Leydesdorff, L., & Nerghes, A. (2017). Co-word maps and topic modeling: A comparison using small and medium-sized corpora (N < 1,000). Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(4), 1024–1035. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23740 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23740

Leydesdorff, L., & Welbers, K. (2011). The semantic mapping of words and co-words in contexts. Journal of Informetrics, 5(3), 469–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.008 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2011.01.008

Newman, M. (2018). Networks. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198805090.001.0001

Nousiainen, M., & Koponen, I. T. (2020). Pre-Service Teachers’ Declarative Knowledge of Wave-Particle Dualism of Electrons and Photons: Finding Lexicons by Using Network Analysis. Education Sciences, 10(3), 76. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030076 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10030076

Nousiainen, M., & Vuola, K. (accepted to be published). Analysing argumentation episodes: A case study from physics teacher education. FMSERA Journal.

Rueckner, W., & Titcomb, P. (1996). A lecture demonstration of single photon interference. American Journal of Physics, 64(2), 184–188. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18302 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18302

Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J. P. (2011). Argument-Driven Inquiry as a way to help students learn how to participate in scientific argumentation and craft written arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2), 217–257. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20421

Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005

Vuola, K., Nousiainen, M., & Koponen, I. T. (2023). Pre-service teachers’ vocabularies of the language of science in the context of learning about electrons and photons | LUMAT: International Journal on Math, Science and Technology Education. https://journals.helsinki.fi/lumat/article/view/1924 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.11.2.1924

Wohlrapp, H. R. (2014). The Concept of Argument: A Philosophical Foundation. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8762-8