- 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

Phenomenographic analysis and comparison of students’ conceptual understanding of electric and magnetic fields and the principle of superposition

Esmeralda Campos

Eder Hernandez and Pablo Barniol

Genaro Zavala*

  • Tecnologico de Monterrey, Writing Lab, Institute for the Future of Education, Av. E. Garza Sada 2501, Monterrey, 64849, Mexico

  • Tecnologico de Monterrey, Av. E. Garza Sada 2501, Monterrey, 64849, Mexico

  • Tecnologico de Monterrey, School of Engineering and Sciences, E. Garza Sada 2501, Monterrey 64849, Mexico
  • Universidad Andres Bello, School of Engineering, Antonio Varas 880, Santiago 7500973, Chile

  • *genaro.zavala@tec.mx
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020117 – Published 13 September, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020117

Abstract

There are studies of students’ understanding of the concept of the electric field, the magnetic field, and the use of the superposition principle that have contributed to the creation of both educational strategies and assessment tools. However, the difficulties of these two concepts have not been compared comprehensively. Therefore, this study aims to compare students’ conceptual understanding of electric and magnetic fields in questions regarding the field created by one source and the field produced by a system of two sources. We focus our study on students’ explanations about the magnitude and direction of the field and their application of the superposition principle in both contexts (electric and magnetic). We conducted this study with 322 engineering students in a Mexican university. We designed two versions of an open-ended questionnaire, one with the context of electricity and the other with magnetism. We created the questions using the parallelism between electricity and magnetism and used schematic representations with similar surface features to represent this parallelism. Analyzing the data through a phenomenographic approach, the students’ drawings and explanations gave insight into their understanding of the concept of field and the superposition principle application in the context of electricity and magnetism. We found that students have similar categories of understanding the concept of the electric and the magnetic field. In both contexts, there is an evident relationship between applying the principle of superposition and understanding the concept of field. We found that there is a greater tendency that a student correctly applies the superposition principle if that student has a robust representation of the field. We found evidence that students consistently merge two different representations (vector plots and field lines) in electricity and magnetism. We named this category of representation “hybrid vectors and field lines.” We also found that some students who draw hybrid representations of the field can still apply the superposition principle correctly. However, some conceptual understanding difficulties are dependent on the context: the known difficulty of confusion between forces and fields is more attached to the electricity context. The confusion between electricity and magnetism concepts is more relevant in the magnetism context. As in other literature, we found more evidence that the correct answer in multiple-choice questions may lead students who have mild difficulties (such as memorization and creating a hybrid representation) to choose a correct answer. We recommend that teachers and researchers of electricity and magnetism acknowledge the relationship between the conceptual understanding of the field and applying the superposition principle. We suggest that instructors be attentive to how they approach using representations of electric and magnetic fields.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (36)

  1. J. L. Docktor and J. P. Mestre, Synthesis of discipline-based education research in physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 020119 (2014).
  2. J. Guisasola, J. M. Almudí, and J. L. Zubimendi, Difficulties in learning the introductory magnetic field theory in the first years of university, Sci. Educ. 88, 443 (2004).
  3. D. P. Maloney, T. L. O’Kuma, C. J. Hieggelke, and A. Van Heuvelen, Surveying students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism, Am. J. Phys. 69, S12 (2001).
  4. T. M. Scaife and A. F. Heckler, Interference between electric and magnetic concepts in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 7, 010104 (2011).
  5. M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, and E. Rees, Expertise in problem solving, Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence, edited by R. J. Sternberg (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1982), Vol. 1.
  6. T. M. Scaife and A. F. Heckler, The effect of field representation on student responses to magnetic force questions, AIP Conf. Proc. 951, 180 (2007).
  7. S. Törnkvist, K.-A. Pettersson, and G. Tranströmer, Confusion by representation: On student’s comprehension of the electric field concept, Am. J. Phys. 61, 335 (1993).
  8. D. J. Griffiths, Introduction to Electrodynamics, 4th ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2018).
  9. X. Bohigas and M. C. Periago, Alternative mental models of second-year engineering students for coulomb’s law and the electric field, Rev. Electron. Investig. Educ. 12, 1 (2010), http://redie.uabc.mx/vol12no1/contenido-bohigas.html.
  10. C. Furió and J. Guisasola, Difficulties in learning the concept of electric field, Sci. Educ. 82, 511 (1998).
  11. A. Garza and G. Zavala, Contrasting students’ understanding of electric field and electric force, AIP Conf. Proc. 1513, 142 (2013).
  12. J. Li and C. Singh, Investigating and improving introductory physics students’ understanding of the electric field and superposition principle, Eur. J. Phys. 38, 055702 (2017).
  13. M. Saarelainen, A. Laaksonen, and P. E. Hirvonen, Students’ initial knowledge of electric and magnetic fields—more profound explanations and reasoning models for undesired conceptions, Eur. J. Phys. 28, 51 (2007).
  14. L. Ding, R. Chabay, B. Sherwood, and R. Beichner, Evaluating an electricity and magnetism assessment tool: Brief electricity and magnetism assessment, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2, 010105 (2006).
  15. J. Li and C. Singh, Developing and validating a conceptual survey to assess introductory physics students’ understanding of magnetism, Eur. J. Phys. 38, 025702 (2017).
  16. M. W. Mccolgan, R. A. Finn, D. L. Broder, and G. E. Hassel, Assessing students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res., 13, 020121 (2017).
  17. E. Campos, G. Zavala, K. Zuza, and J. Guisasola, Electric field lines: The implications of students’ interpretation on their understanding on the concept of electric field and the superposition principle, Am. J. Phys. 87, 660 (2019).
  18. S. Rainson, G. Tranströmer, and L. Viennot, Students’ understanding of superposition of electric fields, Am. J. Phys. 62, 1026 (1994).
  19. L. Viennot and S. Rainson, Design and evaluation of a research-based teaching sequence: the superposition of electric field, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 21, 1 (1999).
  20. C. Singh, Student understanding of symmetry and Gauss’s law of electricity, Am. J. Phys. 74, 923 (2006).
  21. D. P. Maloney, Charged poles?, Phys. Educ. 20, 310 (1985).
  22. M. H. P. Kesonen, M. A. Asikainen, and P. E. Hirvonen, University students’ conceptions of the electric and magnetic fields and their interrelationships, Eur. J. Phys. 32, 521 (2011).
  23. E. Hernandez, E. Campos, P. Barniol, and G. Zavala, The effect of similar surface features on students’ understanding of the interaction of charges with electric and magnetic fields, Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference 2019, Provo, UT, 2019 (2020), https://www.compadre.org/per/items/detail.cfm?ID=15279.
  24. F. Marton, Phenomenography—Describing conceptions of the world around us, Instr. Sci. 10, 177 (1981).
  25. H. D. Young and R. A. Freedman, University Physics with Modern Physics, 13th ed. (Pearson, Mexico, 2013).
  26. L. C. McDermott and P. S. Shaffer, Tutorials in Introductory Physics (Pearson Education, Buenos Aires, 2001).
  27. P. Barniol, E. Campos, and G. Zavala, Conceptual Survey of Electricity and Magnetism: Analysis of the items and recommendations for improvement, Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference 2016, Sacramento, CA, 2016 (2016), p. 44, https://www.compadre.org/per/items/detail.cfm?ID=14189.
  28. R. Chabay and B. Sherwood, Matter and Interactions (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2015).
  29. E. Campos and G. Zavala, A look into students’ interpretation of electric field lines, in Handbook of Research on Driving STEM Learning With Educational Technologies, edited by M. Ramírez-Montoya (IGI Global, Hershey, PA, 2017), 10.4018/978-1-5225-2026-9.ch017.
  30. E. Campos, G. Zavala, K. Zuza, and J. Guisasola, Students’ understanding of the concept of the electric field through conversions of multiple representations, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010135 (2020).
  31. K. Zuza, P. Van Kampen, M. De Cock, T. Kelly, and J. Guisasola, Introductory university physics students’ understanding of some key characteristics of classical theory of the electromagnetic field, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 020117 (2018).
  32. F. Marton, Phenomenography—A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality, J. Thought 21, 28 (1986), http://idr.uin-antasari.ac.id/473/1/kualitatifrisetEDUCATION.pdf#page=151.
  33. A. Garza and G. Zavala, Electric field concept: Effect of the context and the type of questions, AIP Conf. Proc. 1289, 145 (2010).
  34. E. Campos, G. Zavala, K. Zuza, and J. Guisasola, Students’ conversion from electric field line diagrams to other representations, Proceedings of the Physics Education Research Conference 2019, Provo, UT, edited by Y. Cao, S. Wolf, and M.  B. Bennett (AIP, New York, 2019), https://www.compadre.org/per/items/detail.cfm?ID=15259.
  35. L. Bollen, P. van Kampen, C. Baily, M. Kelly, and M. De Cock, Student difficulties regarding symbolic and graphical representations of vector fields, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 13, 020109 (2017).
  36. M. M. Wooten, A. M. Cool, E. E. Prather, and K. D. Tanner, Comparison of performance on multiple-choice questions and open-ended questions in an introductory astronomy laboratory, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 10, 020103 (2014).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020117– Published 13 September, 2021
  • Received 16 September 2020
  • Accepted 21 June 2021
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