Where Does Physics Education Research Belong? A Cross National Comparison of Institutional Contexts
17th International Baskent Congress On Socıal, Humanities, Administrative, and Educational Sciences, Ankara, Türkiye, 12 - 14 Şubat 2026, ss.1451-1461, (Tam Metin Bildiri)
- Yayın Türü: Bildiri / Tam Metin Bildiri
- Basıldığı Şehir: Ankara
- Basıldığı Ülke: Türkiye
- Sayfa Sayıları: ss.1451-1461
- Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi Adresli: Evet
Özet
Physics Education Research (PER) has emerged over the past decades as an influential field dedicated to understanding the teaching and learning of physics. Despite its growing international visibility, PER has not developed as a uniform or homogeneous field. Instead, its institutional positioning, theoretical orientation, and research focus vary considerably across national and regional contexts. This study addresses the question “Where does Physics Education Research belong?” by examining how PER is institutionally situated within higher education systems in different countries.
Using a qualitative comparative research design, the study draws on document analysis and a systematic examination of PER groups, doctoral training pathways, and research structures in the United States, France, Türkiye, and selected European contexts. The analysis is structured around four analytical dimensions: institutional location, graduate training pathways, theoretical and epistemological orientation, and research focus.
The findings reveal clear cross national differences. In the United States, PER is predominantly embedded within physics departments and commonly pursued through doctoral programs in physics, reinforcing its identity as a discipline based research field. In contrast, PER related research in France and parts of Europe is largely situated within faculties of education or interdisciplinary didactics units, where epistemological and curricular concerns shape it. Türkiye represents an emerging context in which PER related studies are primarily conducted within science or physics education programs, with limited institutional presence in physics departments.
To synthesize these patterns, the study identifies five cross national clusters of PER that reflect varying degrees of institutionalization and disciplinary alignment. Together, these findings suggest that PER functions simultaneously as a disciplinary, interdisciplinary, and emerging field, depending on national academic traditions and institutional structures. By providing a comparative framework, this study contributes to a clearer understanding of PER’s global diversity. It offers insights for institutional planning and future research in contexts where PER is not yet formally institutionalized.Keywords: Physics Education Research, Institutional Contexts, Cross National Comparison
* This study was supported by TÜBİTAK 2219 Post-Doctoral Research Program