Abstract
In the context of developing a physics textbook for upper secondary schools, currently ongoing at the Department of Physics Education, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, the goal of this study is to answer the question: what are the requirements for physics textbooks, or more broadly for science textbooks, that repeatedly appear in studies published in international context? To address this question, a systematic search of the Web of Science database, along with content analysis and comparison of the studies found, were conducted. Especially, using various combinations of keywords, six relevant studies were identified. These studies revealed 25 recurring requirements for physics or science textbooks. Similar requirements were grouped into three main categories (and several subcategories): i) content requirements (subject-matter independent of the student, student-oriented subject matter content, student cognition, student motivation, diversity), ii) formal requirements (verbal aspects, graphical aspects), iii) structural requirements for the textbook (layout of illustrations and text, textbook organization). An extensive appendix of the article provides the original (exact) wording of the identified textbook requirements. Based on the study findings, tools will be designed to enable students, teachers, and physics education experts to evaluate the developing physics textbook. The results of the study and the developed tools will also be applicable for reflecting on other science textbooks.
References
Campanario, J. M. (2006). Using textbook errors to teach physics: Examples of specific activities. European Journal of Physics, 27, 975–981. https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/27/4/028
Cheung, D., & Ng, P.‐H. (2000). Science teachers' beliefs about curriculum design. Research in Science Education, 30(4), 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461556
Çırakoğlu, N., Toksoy, S. E., & Reisoğlu, İ. (2022). Designing, developing, and evaluating an interactive e-book based on the Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) method. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 6, 95–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-022-00071-3
Devetak, I., & Vogrinc, J. (2013). The criteria for evaluating the quality of the science textbooks. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Critical analysis of science textbooks: Evaluating instructional effectiveness (pp. 3–15). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4168-3_1
Handayani, S., Adisendjaja, Y. H., & Kusnadi (2021). The development of Musi estuary ecosystem alternative teaching materials as supplementary books for biology learning in high schools. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1806, 012155. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1806/1/012155
Kolářová, R. (2013). Fyzika na základní škole po roce 1945 z pohledu vývoje školské soustavy a učebnic fyziky. Matematika–fyzika–informatika, 22(4), P31–P46.
Lepil, O. (2010). Teorie a praxe tvorby výukových materiálů. Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci. http://www.skolyprovenkov.ostrozsko.cz/prilohy/skola18/lepil.pdf
Lepil, O. (2013). K vývoji učebnic fyziky pro střední školu gymnaziálního typu. Matematika–fyzika–informatika, 22(4), P16–P30.
McDonald, C. V. (2016). Evaluating junior secondary science textbook usage in Australian schools. Research in Science Education, 46, 481–509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-015-9468-8
Musilová, J. (2012). Fyzikální omyly ve výuce mechaniky. Československý časopis pro fyziku, 62(5–6), 346–357.
Musilová, J. (2016). Nejde jen o kyvadlo. Československý časopis pro fyziku, 66(6), 393–396.
Ogan-Bekiroglu, F. (2007). To what degree do the currently used physics textbooks meet the expectations? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(4), 599–628. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9045-8
Sikorová, Z. (2004). Výběr učebnic na základních a středních školách. Ostravská univerzita, Pedagogická fakulta.
Sliško, J. (2006). Electric charge on humans: Should students buy what the textbooks sell? Physics Education, 41, 114–116. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/41/2/F08
Vojíř, K., & Rusek, M. (2019). Science education textbook research trends: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Science Education, 41(11), 1496–1516. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1613584
Volf, I., & Vybíral, B. (2013). Vývoj českých učebnic fyziky do poloviny 20. století. Matematika–fyzika–informatika, 22(4), P2–P15.
Wan Sulaiman, W. N. A., & Mustafa, S. E. (2020). Usability elements in digital textbook development: A systematic review. Publishing Research Quarterly, 36(1), 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-019-09675-3
Zajkov, O., Gegovska-Zajkova, S., & Mitrevski, B. (2017). Textbook-caused misconceptions, inconsistencies, and experimental safety risks of a grade 8 physics textbook. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(5), 837–852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9715-0
Žák, V. (2018). Kvalita fyzikálního vzdělávání v rukou učitele. Univerzita Karlova, Nakladatelství Karolinum.
Žák, V., & Kolář, P. (2023). Physics curriculum in upper secondary schools: What leading physicists want. Science Education, 107(3), 677–712.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).