<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Jana Skrabankova</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Stanislav Popelka</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Marketa Beitlova</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">STUDENTS’ ABILITY TO WORK WITH GRAPHS IN PHYSICS STUDIES RELATED TO THREE TYPICAL STUDENT GROUPS</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">education in physics</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">experimental study</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eye-tracking</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">gifted children</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">graph</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2020</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">April/2020</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2020/987-1586941849.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">19</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Continuous</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Graphs are often used to represent mathematical functions, to illustrate data from social and natural sciences, or to specify scientific theories. With increasing emphasis on the development of scientific research skills, the work with graphs and data interpretation are gaining in importance. The research involved an eye-tracking experiment conducted to evaluate student work with graphs in physics. Eye-movement data were recorded using the GazePoint eye-tracker. A total of 40 third-year grammar school students participated in the research. These students were allocated into three groups by a physics teacher. These groups were called PLUS, AVERAGE and MINUS. The PLUS group showed excellent results in education and included gifted physics students. The MINUS group was composed of the opposite end of this cognitive spectrum, whose members made the most mistakes in graph reading. The aim of the experiment was to find the differences between students allocated to these three groups and to evaluate whether the allocation based on the teacher’s experience, long-term observations and the students’ previous achievements was sufficient. The results showed that students from all three groups had problems with reading graphs in physics. According to the eye-movement data, several students who had been incorrectly assigned to groups were identified. </style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">298-316</style></section></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Frackson Mumba</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Erin  Wilson</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Vivien M.  Chabalengula</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">William  Mejia</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Simeon  Mbewe</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">ELEMENTARY EDUCATION PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS’ ATTITUDE TOWARDS GRAPHS</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Journal of Baltic Science Education</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">affect and value</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Attitude</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">cognitive competence</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">graph</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2009</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">October/2009</style></date></pub-dates></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://oaji.net/articles/2014/987-1404740242.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">8</style></volume><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This study examined pre-service elementary education teachers’ attitude towards graphs. Attitude was defined in terms of six aspects: Effort, Value, Cognitive competency, Affect, Difficulty and Interest. Data was collected through a questionnaire. Pre-service teachers felt they had cognitive competence for graphing, valued graphs and expressed affection for graphs regardless of their perceived difficulties and low interest in graphs. Value was the only aspect that correlated with all other five aspects, in particular with Affect. Surprisingly, the number of mathematics courses taken by pre-service teachers did not make any difference in their attitude towards graphs. However, the number of science courses they took in high school made a difference in their attitude towards graphs. These findings have implications for teacher education and mathematics and science teaching and learning.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">3</style></issue><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Original article</style></work-type><section><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">172-181 </style></section></record></records></xml>