- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Physics Education Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Design of a profession-oriented course on theoretical mechanics for physics education students

Marianne Korner1,* and Christos N. Likos2

  • 1University of Vienna, Faculty of Physics, Experimental Basic Training and University Didactics, Porzellangasse 4, 1090 Vienna, Austria
  • 2University of Vienna, Faculty of Physics, Computational and Soft Matter Physics, Kolingasse 14-16, 1090 Vienna, Austria

  • *Contact author: marianne.korner@univie.ac.at
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 010131 – Published 26 March, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/1lc2-2372

Abstract

We report on a profession-oriented course we offered at the University of Vienna, aimed at physics education teacher students. The course on theoretical classical mechanics was conceived and designed from the outset with the explicit goal of bridging the gap between the abstract, mathematical notions employed in theoretical physics and the concrete future needs of prospective teachers in their profession. We aimed to counter both the negative attitudes of students toward theoretical physics and the interrelated skepticism of professors regarding the students’ mathematical proficiency. Our main findings are that these goals can indeed be achieved through a careful selection of course material and the associated mathematical tools, through closely interwoven lecture topics and exercises, and through thorough planning according to principles for high-school teaching known from science education research. Establishing close connections between the material taught in the course and the students’ future occupation as high-school teachers has proven to be of utmost importance. This is possible without any sacrifice of mathematical rigor or the quality of physics presented.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (35)

  1. R. Duit et al., The model of educational reconstruction–A framework for improving teaching and learning science, in Science Education Research and Practice in Europe, edited by D. Jorde and J. Dillon (Brill, Leiden, 2012), pp. 13–37.
  2. D. Gerlach and E. Leupold, Schritt für Schritt: Einsteigen—Gestalten—Durchhalten, in Praxisbuch für Studium, Referendariat und Unterricht (Friedrich Verlag, Hannover, 2017).
  3. M. Hopf (private communication).
  4. University of Vienna, Studierende und Studienzulassungen nach Studienprogrammleitung und Studienrichtung (University of Vienna, Vienna, 2019).
  5. A. Gil, Die Vorlesung im Kontext der Universität als Gemeinschaft. Zur Interrelation von Rhetorik und Hochschuldidaktik, in Lob der Vorlesung. Vorschläge zur Verständigung über Form, Funktion und Ziele universitärer Lehre, edited by R. Egger and B. Eugster (Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 2020).
  6. G. Reinmann, Die Vorlesung in der Hochschuldidaktik, in Lob der Vorlesung. Vorschläge zur Verständigung über Form, Funktion und Ziele universitärer Lehre, edited by R. Egger and B. Eugster (Springer VS, Wiesbaden, 2020).
  7. A. Widodo, Constructivist Oriented Lessons. The Learning Environments and the Teaching Sequences, European University Studies (Peter Lang GmbH, Frankfurt/Main, 2004), Vol. 915.
  8. R. R. Hake, Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses, Am. J. Phys. 66, 64 (1998).
  9. D. Hestenes, M. Wells, and G. Swackhamer, The Force Concept Inventory, Phys. Teach. 30, 141 (1992).
  10. I. Halloun and D. Hestenes, The initial knowledge state of college physics students, Am. J. Phys. 53, 1043 (1985).
  11. H. Muckenfuß, Themen und Kontexte als Strukturelemente des naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts, PhyDid A 2–3, 57 (2004).
  12. A. Collins, J. S. Brown, and S. E. Newman, Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics, in Knowing, Learning, and Instruction, edited by L. L. B. Resnick (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New York, 1989), pp. 453–494.
  13. A. Collins, J. S. Brown, and A. Holum, Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible, Am. Educ. 15, 6 (1991).
  14. A. Collins, Design Issues for Learning Environments, Technical Report Series (Center for Technology in Education, New York, NY, Washington, DC, 1993).
  15. R. McTaggart, Guiding principles for participatory action research, in Participatory Action Research: International Contexts and Consequences, edited by R. McTaggart (State University of New York Press, Albany 1997).
  16. S. Kemmis, R. McTaggart, and R. Nixon, The action research planner, in Doing Critical Participatory Action Research (Springer, Singapore, 2014).
  17. W. Carr and S. Kemmis, Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research (Falmer, London, 1986).
  18. S. Kemmis, Action research as a practice-based practice, Educ. Action Res. 17, 463 (2009).
  19. D. Greenwood and M. Levin, Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change (Sage, Thousand Oaks, 2007).
  20. A. Feldman, Teachers, responsibility and action research, Educ. Action Res. 15, 239 (2007).
  21. A. Feldman et al., Teachers Investigate Their Work: An Introduction to Action Research across the Professions (Routledge, London and New York, 2018).
  22. M. Riel, Understanding action research, Available from https://www.ccarweb.org/what-is-action-research (2023) [cited May 9, 2023].
  23. K. Holzkamp, Lernen. Subjektwissenschaftliche Grundlegung (Campus, Frankfurt, 1993).
  24. R. Duit and D. F. Treagust, Conceptual change: Still a powerful framework for improving the practice of science instruction, in Issues and Challenges in Science Education Research, edited by K. C. T. Tan and M. Kim (Springer, Heidelberg, 2012), pp. 43–54.
  25. A. Widodo and R. Duit, Konstruktivistische Sichtweisen vom Lernen und Lehren und die Praxis des Physikunterrichts, Z. Didakt. Naturwiss. 10, 233 (2004).
  26. P. G. Hewitt, Conceptual Physics. Teacher’s Edition (Pearson, Boston, 2009).
  27. University of Vienna, Subcurriculum for teacher training students, physics, Available from https://mtbl.univie.ac.at/storage/media/mtbl02/2015_2016/2015_2016_247.pdf (2016) [cited October 9, 2023].
  28. T. Wilhelm, H. Schecker, and M. Hopf, Ein Lehrbuch für Studium, Referendariat und Unterrichtspraxis, in Unterrichtskonzeptionen für den Physikunterricht (Springer, Berlin 2021).
  29. M. Hohenwarter, GeoGebra—Didaktische Materialien und Anwendungen für den Mathematikunterricht (University of Salzburg, Salzburg 2006).
  30. T. McAfee and R. Ramanujam, Visualizing the conic sections, Available from: https://www.geogebra.org/m/hGvXW3Dy (2017) [cited May 28, 2024].
  31. F. K. Oser and F. J. Baeriswyl, Choreographies of teaching: Bridging instruction to learning, in Handbook on Research on Teaching, 4th ed., edited by V. Richardson (American Educational Research Association (AERA), Washington, 2001), Vol. 4, pp. 1031–1065.
  32. P. G. Hewitt, Figuring physics on the web, Phys. Teach. 47, 4 (2009).
  33. C. S. Dweck and D. S. Yeager, Mindsets: A view from two eras, Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 14, 481 (2019).
  34. L. S. Shulman, Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform, Harv. Educ. Rev. 57, 1 (1987).
  35. J. Carlson and K. R. Daehler, The refined consensus model of pedagogical content knowledge in science education, in Repositioning Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Teachers’ Knowledge for Teaching Science, edited by A. Hume, R. Cooper, and A. Borowski (Springer Nature, Singapore, 2019), pp. 77–93.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 010131– Published 26 March, 2026
  • Received 31 October 2025
  • Accepted 24 February 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation