- 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 conceptual resources for understanding electric circuits

Lauren C. Bauman1, Brynna Hansen2, Lisa M. Goodhew2, and Amy D. Robertson2

PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 20, 020128 – Published 11 October, 2024

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.20.020128

Abstract

Physics Education Research has a rich history of identifying common student ideas about specific physics topics. In the context of electric circuits, existing research on students’ ideas has primarily focused on misconceptions, misunderstandings, and difficulties. In this paper, we take a resource-oriented approach to identifying common student ideas about circuits by characterizing ideas we see as generative “seeds of science” that could form the basis of more sophisticated understandings. Based on our analysis of 1557 university physics student responses to five conceptual questions, we identify four common resources for understanding circuits.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (62)

  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. D. Hestenes, M. Wells, and G. Swackhamer, Force Concept Inventory, Phys. Teach. 30, 141 (1992).
  3. L. C. McDermott, Millikan Lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned—Closing the gap, Am. J. Phys. 59, 301 (1991).
  4. L. C. McDermott, Oersted Medal Lecture 2001: “Physics Education Research—The Key to Student Learning”, Am. J. Phys. 69, 1127 (2001).
  5. L. Shulman, Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform, Harv. Educ. Rev. 57, 1 (1987).
  6. D. Hammer, Student resources for learning introductory Physics, Am. J. Phys. 68, S52 (2000).
  7. D. Hammer, A. Elby, R. E. Scherr, and E. F. Redish, Resources, framing, and transfer, in Transfer of Learning from a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective (IAP, Greenwich, CT, 2005), pp. 89–119.
  8. E. Redish, A Theoretical Framework for Physics Education Research: Modeling Student Thinking (2004).
  9. A. A. diSessa, Toward an epistemology of physics, Cognit. Instr. 10, 105 (1993).
  10. J. P. Smith, A. A. diSessa, and J. Roschelle, Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition, J. Learn. Sci. 3, 115 (1993).
  11. J. Minstrell, Student Thinking and Related Assessment: Creating a Facet-Based Learning Environment, in Grading the Nation’s Report Card: Research from the Evaluation of NAEP, edited by National Research Council (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2000).
  12. J. Minstrell, Facets of students’ knowledge, and relevant instruction, in Proceedings of an International Workshop held at the University of Bremen, 1991, edited by R. Duit, F. Goldberg, and H. Niedderer (1992).
  13. R. Cohen, B. Eylon, and U. Ganiel, Potential difference and current in simple electric circuits: A study of students’ concepts, Am. J. Phys. 51, 407 (1983).
  14. J.-J. Dupin and S. Johsua, Conceptions of French pupils concerning electric circuits: Structure and evolution, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 24, 791 (1987).
  15. P. V. Engelhardt and R. J. Beichner, Students’ understanding of direct current resistive electrical circuits, Am. J. Phys. 72, 98 (2003).
  16. T. V. Goris, Common misunderstandings of electricity: Analysis of interview responses of electrical engineering technology students, Int. J. Eng. Pedagogy 6, 4 (2016).
  17. H. Küçüközer and S. Kocakülah, Secondary school students’ misconceptions about simple electric circuits, Tufed-Tused 4, 101 (2007), https://www.tused.org/index.php/tused/article/view/663/568.
  18. L. C. McDermott and P. S. Shaffer, Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part I: Investigation of student understanding, Am. J. Phys. 60, 994 (1992).
  19. A. Métioui, C. Brassard, J. Levasseur, and M. Lavoie, The persistence of students’ unfounded beliefs about electrical circuits: The case of Ohm’s law, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 18, 193 (1996).
  20. V. Picciarelli, M. D. Gennaro, R. Stella, and E. Conte, A study of university students’ understanding of simple electric circuits Part 2: Batteries, Ohm’s law, power dissipated, resistors in parallel, Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 16, 57 (1991).
  21. D. M. Shipstone, C. v Rhöneck, W. Jung, C. Kärrqvist, J.-J. Dupin, S. Johsua, and P. Licht, A study of students’ understanding of electricity in five European countries, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 10, 303 (1988).
  22. C.-H. Tsai, H.-Y. Chen, C.-Y. Chou, and K.-D. Lain, Current as the key concept of Taiwanese students’ understandings of electric circuits, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 29, 483 (2007).
  23. B. W. Harrer, V. J. Flood, and M. C. Wittmann, Productive resources in students’ ideas about energy: An alternative analysis of Watts’ original interview transcripts, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 9, 023101 (2013).
  24. D. Hammer and E. van Zee, Seeing the Science in Children’s Thinking: Case Studies of Student Inquiry in Physical Science, 1st ed. (Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH, 2006).
  25. D. Hammer, Discovery learning and discovery teaching, Cognit. Instr. 15, 485 (1997).
  26. D. Hammer, Student inquiry in a physics class discussion, Cognit. Instr. 13, 401 (1995).
  27. P. M. Heller and F. N. Finley, Variable uses of alternative conceptions: A case study in current electricity, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 29, 259 (1992).
  28. A. Leniz, K. Zuza, and J. Guisasola, Difficulties understanding the explicative model of simple DC circuits in introductory physics courses, presented at PER Conf. 2014, Minneapolis, MN, 10.1119/perc.2014.pr.034.
  29. P. Licht and G. D. Thijs, Method to trace coherence and persistence of preconceptions, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 12, 403 (1990).
  30. D. Smith and P. van Kampen, Teaching electric circuits with multiple batteries: A qualitative approach, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 7, 020115 (2011).
  31. S. Bull, T. J. Jackson, and M. J. Lancaster, Students’ interest in their misconceptions in first-year electrical circuits and mathematics courses, Int. J. Electr. Eng. Educ. 47, 307 (2010).
  32. B.-S. Eylon and U. Ganiel, Macro-micro relationships: The missing link between electrostatics and electrodynamics in students’ reasoning, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 12, 79 (1990).
  33. D. M. Shipstone, A study of children’s understanding of electricity in simple DC circuits, Eur. J. Sci. Educ. 6, 185 (1984).
  34. D. M. Shipstone, Electricity in Simple Circuits, in Children’s Ideas in Science (Milton Keynes Open University Press, Philadelphia, 1985).
  35. D. E. Brown and D. Hammer, Conceptual change in physics, in International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (Routledge, London, 2008).
  36. R. E. Scherr, Modeling student thinking: An example from special relativity, Am. J. Phys. 75, 272 (2007).
  37. B. W. Harrer, Identifying productive resources in secondary school students’ discourse about energy, The University of Maine, 2013, https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/2065/.
  38. D. Hammer, Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions, J. Learn. Sci. 5, 97 (1996).
  39. A. Elby, R. E. Scherr, T. McCaskey, R. Hodges, E. F. Redish, D. Hammer, and T. Bing, Maryland Open-Source Tutorials in Physics Sense-Making, Part 1 (2007).
  40. T. D. Cook, Randomized experiments in educational policy research: A critical examination of the reasons the educational evaluation community has offered for not doing them, Educ. Eval. Policy Anal. 24, 175 (2002).
  41. L. M. Goodhew, A. D. Robertson, P. R. L. Heron, and R. E. Scherr, Students’ context-sensitive use of conceptual resources: A pattern across different styles of question about mechanical waves, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010137 (2021).
  42. M. B. Miles and A. M. Huberman, Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook, 2nd ed. (Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1994).
  43. S. Kanim and X. C. Cid, Demographics of physics education research, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020106 (2020).
  44. J. C. Ng, S. S. Lee, and Y. K. Pak, Chapter 4 Contesting the model minority and perpetual foreigner stereotypes: A critical review of literature on Asian Americans in education, Rev. Res. Educ. 31, 95 (2007).
  45. National Center for Education Statistics, Undergraduate enrollment, https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cha.
  46. 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).
  47. A. D. Robertson, L. M. Goodhew, R. E. Scherr, and P. R. L. Heron, University student conceptual resources for understanding forces, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 17, 010121 (2021).
  48. F. Marton, Phenomenography—A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality, J. Thought 21, 28 (1986), https://www.jstor.org/stable/42589189.
  49. K. H. Krippendorff, Content Analysis—3rd edition: An Introduction to Its Methodology (SAGE Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2013).
  50. A. D. Robertson, L. M. Goodhew, L. C. Bauman, B. Hansen, and A. T. Alesandrini, Identifying student conceptual resources for understanding physics: A practical guide for researchers, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020138 (2023).
  51. M. Banerjee, M. Capozzoli, L. McSweeney, and D. Sinha, Beyond Kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures, Can. J. Stat. Rev. Can. Stat. 27, 3 (1999).
  52. L. C. McDermott and Physics Education Group, Physics by Inquiry: An Introduction to Physics and the Physical Sciences (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1995), Vol. 2.
  53. R. Mondesir and A. D. Robertson, Toward characterizing the demographics of Introductory Physics Courses, presented at PER Conf. 2020, Virtual conference, 10.1119/perc.2020.pr.Mondesir.
  54. A. D. Robertson, L. M. Goodhew, L. C. Bauman, and P. R. L. Heron, ACORN Physics Tutorials, https://www.physport.org/curricula/ACORN/.
  55. A. Rouinfar, S. Reid, D. Barnett, W. Adams, M. Dubson, A. Paul, K. Perkins, C. Wieman, M. Hermsmeyer, and C. McCutchan, Circuit Construction Kit: DC, https://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulations/circuit-construction-kit-dc/about.
  56. E. Duckworth, The Having of Wonderful Ideas” and Other Essays on Teaching and Learning, 3rd ed. (Teachers College Press, New York, 2006).
  57. T. Ole, B. Odden, and R. S. Russ, Sensemaking epistemic game: A model of student sensemaking processes in introductory physics, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 020122 (2018).
  58. Native Life & Tribal Relations, https://www.washington.edu/diversity/tribal-relations/.
  59. Acknowledging the Coast Salish Peoples, https://spu.edu/diversity/spu-diversity-commitment/oiex-land-page.
  60. L. C. McDermott and P. S. Shaffer, Tutorials in Introductory Physics (Pearson College Div, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2001).
  61. R. J. Beichner, SCALE-UP, https://www.physport.org/methods/method.cfm?G=SCALE_UP.
  62. C. Hieggelke, D. Maloney, S. Kanim, and T. O’Kuma, Tasks inspired by physics education research, https://www.physport.org/methods/method.cfm?G=TIPER.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 20, 020128– Published 11 October, 2024
  • Received 7 February 2023
  • Accepted 17 June 2024
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