6.Conclusion . 6.1 Chapter Structure. This Chapter Describes

777 WordsMar 2, 20174 Pages
6. Conclusion 6.1 Chapter Structure This chapter describes the PASEDR (Planning- Activity-Support-Evaluation Development-Resources) model, suggested as the LD for physics in higher education. It also outlines limitations of the research and future opportunities for further studies. 6.2 Learning Design for Physics Teaching in Higher Education PASEDR Model: From the summary of the previous chapter, a PASEDR model of Learning Design has been developed (Figure 4). The arrows of the figure show the direction of the cycle. The whole process is reversible. The two-way direction of the arrow indicates that the component of the model can be connected in both ways, such that planning can modify an activity component, however, the activity (for…show more content…
Professional development. The important factor in developing teaching is the acknowledgment for good teaching. Normally, at university, lecturers are awarded for their research, but not so much for teaching. Therefore, they spend lots of time to study physics research. They do not have enough time in studying PER. Sometimes, maybe, they get help from peer experience or workshop. Resources. Although ICT plays an important role, today, in implementing their teaching techniques, most lecturers think that it is not essential. Student engagement and learning by doing is important. For implementing studio type activity and sharing, active learning is important. Figure 4: Learning Design for physics teaching in higher education 6.3 Limitations of the Research As to the limitations of this study, lecturers’ responses are insufficient. In this qualitative research, the data highly relies on participants’ perceptions and beliefs and their honesty and truthfulness, and so the study can be limited. Furthermore, it is a short term study and the data was collected over one semester. Only four lecturers were interviewed. Therefore, it is not generalisable to any other context or unit. During data collection, neither an explanation nor an introduction of the framework from which a teacher’s action and teaching knowledge were analyzed was presented to the lecturers. A different approach, in further research, could explore
Open Document