- 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

Effect of scale comprehension on student reasoning about astronomical phenomena. I. The apparent sizes of Moon and Sun and Solar Eclipses

Willem Keppens*, Mieke De Cock, and Hans Van Winckel

Wim Van Dooren

Jan Sermeus

  • Department of Physics and Astronomy, KU Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200C, 3001 Leuven, Belgium

  • Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Dekenstraat 2, 3000 Leuven, Belgium

  • Department of Physics and Astronomy, KU Leuven, Celestijnenlaan 200C, 3001 Leuven, Belgium, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Dekenstraat 2, 3000 Leuven, Belgium, and Royal Observatory of Belgium, Planetarium, Bouchoutlaan 10, 1020 Brussels, Belgium

  • *Contact author: willem.keppens@kuleuven.be
PDF

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 020106 – Published 5 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/dvkz-5pt7

Abstract

This paper is the first in a two-part series that investigates students’ reasoning on astronomical phenomena. We interviewed N=25 last-year high school students to uncover their reasoning on three observable phenomena, two of which will be discussed in this paper. The first phenomenon was the apparent sizes of the Moon and the Sun (as seen from Earth) and potential causes for their variation. The second phenomenon regarded the event of a solar eclipse and the difference between total and annular eclipses. The interviews were held in light of the students’ understanding of spatial scales in the Earth-Moon-Sun system. Based on their answers on a prior online survey assessing students’ estimates of these scales, a personal to-scale model of the Earth-Moon-Sun system was provided for every student. The students selected for interviews were those who showed a substantial underestimation of these scales. Students were repetitively encouraged to illustrate their reasoning on both phenomena by using the scale model or by providing a drawing. For both discussed astronomical phenomena, we encountered several alternative explanations that—as far as we know—were not previously documented in the research literature. Many of these relied on an inaccurate comprehension of the involved scales. Although for some students these explanations were in line with the scale model on the interview table representing their substantial underestimations, others did not seem to take spatial scales into account when making suggestions on the causes for these astronomical phenomena. The implications of these findings are discussed.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (85)

  1. H. Davis, C. Milotte, and S. Odenwald, Total solar eclipse misconceptions: Evolving mental models, Bull. AAS 56 (2024).
  2. M. Barnett and J. Morran, Addressing children’s alternative frameworks of the Moon’s phases and eclipses, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 24, 859 (2002).
  3. A. D. Utama, V. K. Yanti, S. Mahtahari, and Alamsyah, The scientific argumentation profile of annular solar eclipse phenomenon June 21st 2020 of physics undergraduate student in Universitas Negeri Surabaya, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1796, 012103 (2021).
  4. T. F. Slater and R. Gelderman, Addressing students’ misconceptions about eclipses, Phys. Teach. 55, 314 (2017).
  5. P. Sadler, The initial knowledge state of high school astronomy students, Ph.D. thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 1992.
  6. B. W. Miller and W. F. Brewer, Misconceptions of astronomical distances, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 32, 1549 (2010).
  7. R. Trumper, A cross-college age study of science and nonscience students’ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts in preservice training for high-school teachers, J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 10, 189 (2001).
  8. L. Shore and R. Kilburn, The effect of astronomy teaching experience on the astronomy interest and conceptions of elementary school teachers, in Proceedings of the 3rd international seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (Misconceptions Trust, Ithaca, NY, 1993), https://mlrg.org/proc3pdfs/Shore_Astronomy.pdf.
  9. A. Lightman and P. M. Sadler, Teacher predictions versus actual student gains, Phys. Teach. 31, 162 (1993).
  10. W. Keppens, M. De Cock, H. Van Winckel, W. Van Dooren, and J. Sermeus, Exploring student estimates of astronomical scales: Impact of question formulation and visualization, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 21, 010159 (2025).
  11. A. Lelliott and M. Rollnick, Big ideas: A review of astronomy education research 1974-2008, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 32, 1771 (2010).
  12. S. Salimpour, M. Fitzgerald, and U. Eriksson, A descriptive overview of English-language publications in the field of astronomy education research, 1898 to 2022, Astron. Educ. J. 4, 140aer-1 (2024).
  13. W. Keppens, M. De Cock, H. Van Winckel, W. V. Dooren, and J. Sermeus, companion paper, Effect of scale comprehension on student reasoning about astronomical phenomena. II. Moon phases, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22 020107 (2026).
  14. V. M. Rajpaul, C. Lindstrøm, M. C. Engel, M. Brendehaug, and S. Allie, Cross-sectional study of students’ knowledge of sizes and distances of astronomical objects, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 020108 (2018).
  15. C. Bakas and T. Mikropoulos, Design of virtual environments for the comprehension of planetary phenomena based on students’ ideas, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 25, 949 (2003).
  16. T. G. K. Bryce and E. J. Blown, Children’s concepts of the shape and size of the Earth, Sun and Moon, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 35, 388 (2013).
  17. A. H. Holway and E. G. Boring, The dependence of apparent visual size upon illumination, Am. J. Psychol. 53, 587 (1940).
  18. E. J. Robinson, The influence of photometric brightness on judgments of size, Am. J. Psychol. 67, 464 (1954).
  19. I. Galili, A. Weizman, and A. Cohen, The sky as a topic in science education, Sci. Educ. 88, 574 (2004).
  20. G. Francis, B. Cummins, J. Kim, L. Grzeczkowski, and E. Thunell, The Moon size illusion does not improve perceptual judgments, Conscious. Cogn. 73, 102754 (2019).
  21. N. Solhkhah and J. Orbach, Determinants of the magnitude of the Moon illusion, Percept. Mot. Skills 29, 87 (1969).
  22. C. Plug and H. E. Ross, The Mystery of the Moon Illusion (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002).
  23. C.-C. Carbon, The Moon as a tiny bright disc: Insights from observations in the planetarium, Perception (London) 44, 821 (2015).
  24. L. Kaufman and I. Rock, The Moon illusion thirty years later, in The Moon Illusion (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1989), pp. 193–234.
  25. K. Suzuki, Moon illusion simulated in complete darkness: Planetarium experiment reexamined, Percept. Psychophys. 49, 349 (1991).
  26. C. Kavanagh, L. Agan, and C. Sneider, Learning about phases of the Moon and eclipses: A guide for teachers and curriculum developers, Astron. Educ. Rev, 4, 19 (2005).
  27. M. Zeilik, C. Schau, and N. Mattern, Misconceptions and their change in university-level astronomy courses, Phys. Teach. 36, 104 (1998).
  28. R. Trumper, University students’ conceptions of basic astronomy concepts, Phys. Educ. 35, 9 (2000).
  29. U. Kanli, A study on identifying the misconceptions of pre-service and in-service teachers about basic astronomy concepts, Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 10, 471 (2014).
  30. H. Kalkan and K. Kiroglu, Science and nonscience students’ ideas about basic astronomy concepts in preservice training for elementary school teachers, Astron. Educ. Rev. 6, 15 (2007).
  31. M. LoPresto and S. Murrell, An astronomical misconceptions survey, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 40, 14 (2011).
  32. F. G. Purwati, N. Ekawanti, Luthfiandari, and P. W. Premadi, Measuring the level of public understanding of total solar eclipse from the mass media: Palembang as sample, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 771, 12026 (2016).
  33. M. Guy and T. Young, Creating eclipses: Using scale models to explore how eclipses happen, Sci. Act. 47, 75 (2010).
  34. D. Schatz and A. Franknoi, The 2023 and 2024 solar eclipse double-header, Sci. Teach. 90, 34 (2023).
  35. F. Karsll and K. Kara Patan, Effects of the context-based approach on students’ conceptual understanding: “The umbra, the solar eclipse and the lunar eclipse”, J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 15, 246 (2016).
  36. E. E. Prather, T. F. Slater, J. P. Adams, J. M. Bailey, L. V. Jones, and J. A. Dostal, Research on a lecture-tutorial approach to teaching introductory astronomy for non–science majors, Astron. Educ. Rev. 3, 122 (2004).
  37. S. A. Kattner, A. C. Burrows, and T. F. Slater, Relationship between students’ spatial ability and effectiveness of two different eclipse teaching pedagogies, Rev. Latinoam. Educ. Astron. 26, 7 (2018).
  38. T. Keating, M. Barnett, S. A. Barab, and K. E. Hay, The virtual solar system project: Developing conceptual understanding of astronomical concepts through building three-dimensional computational models, J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 11, 261 (2002).
  39. K. Imai, Y. Murayama, and T. Yamanishi, Difference in elementary students’ understanding of a solar eclipse by use of ICT, Educ. Inform. Res. 36, 39 (2020).
  40. Ã. Çakiroglu, S. Atabas, M. Aydin, and I. Özyilmaz, Creating concept maps with augmented reality: A case of eclipse of the lunar and solar topic, Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn. 17, 1 (2022).
  41. I. Testa, S. Galano, S. Leccia, and E. Puddu, Development and validation of a learning progression for change of seasons, solar and lunar eclipses, and moon phases, Phys. Rev. ST Phys. Educ. Res. 11, 020102 (2015).
  42. International Astronomical Union, Big Ideas in Astronomy: A Proposed Definition of Astronomy Literacy (International Astronomical Union, 2019).
  43. S. Galano, A. Colantonio, S. Leccia, I. Marzoli, E. Puddu, and I. Testa, Developing the use of visual representations to explain basic astronomy phenomena, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010145 (2018).
  44. B. M. Pena and M. J. Gil Quilez, The importance of images in astronomy education, Int. J. Sci. Educ. 23, 1125 (2001).
  45. T. F. Slater, J. O. Urama, J. C. Holbrook, and R. T. Medupe, A contemporary approach to teaching eclipses, in African Cultural Astronomy, Astrophysics and Space Science Proceedings (Springer Netherlands. Dordrecht, 2008), pp. 95–107.
  46. M. Cole, C. Cohen, J. Wilhelm, and R. Lindell, Spatial thinking in astronomy education research, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 14, 010139 (2018).
  47. S. Vosniadou, Designing curricula for conceptual restructuring: Lessons from the study of knowledge acquisition in astronomy, in Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction (Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1991), pp. 13–16, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED404098.pdf.
  48. D. F. Treagust and C. L. Smith, Secondary students’ understanding of gravity and the motion of planets, School Sci. Math. 89, 380 (2010).
  49. J. Wai, D. Lubinski, and C. P. Benbow, Spatial ability for stem domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance, J. Educ. Psychol. 101, 817 (2009).
  50. R. M. Webb, D. Lubinski, and C. P. Benbow, Spatial ability: A neglected dimension in talent searches for intellectually precocious youth, J. Educ. Psychol. 99, 397 (2007).
  51. E. A. Gunderson, G. Ramirez, S. L. Beilock, and S. C. Levine, The relation between spatial skill and early number knowledge: The role of the linear number line, Dev. Psychol. 48, 1229 (2012).
  52. C. S. Carter, M. A. Larussa, and G. M. Bodner, A study of two measures of spatial ability as predictors of success in different levels of general chemistry, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 24, 645 (1987).
  53. M. Kozhevnikov and R. Thornton, Real-time data display, spatial visualization ability, and learning force and motion concepts, J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 15, 111 (2006).
  54. M. G. Jones, G. Gardner, A. R. Taylor, E. Wiebe, and J. Forrester, Conceptualizing magnification and scale : The roles of spatial visualization and logical thinking, Res. Sci. Educ. 41, 357 (2011).
  55. D. Landy, N. Silbert, and A. Goldin, Getting off at the end of the line: The estimation of large numbers, in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX, 2012), Vol. 34, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/9dz0n5sd#main.
  56. D. Landy, A. Charlesworth, and E. Ottmar, Categories of large numbers in line estimation, Cogn. Sci. 41, 326 (2017).
  57. A. Brass, and S. S. Harkness, Pre-service teachers’ conceptions of the magnitude of large numbers, Invest. Math. Learn. 9, 53 (2017).
  58. S. E. Kastberg and V. Walker, Insights into our understandings of large numbers, Teach. Child. Math. 14, 530 (2008).
  59. S. Serttaş and A. Türkoğlu, Diagnosing students’ misconceptions of astronomy through concept cartoons, Particip. Educ. Res. 7, 164 (2020).
  60. P. Bitzenbauer, S. Navarrete, F. Hennig, M. S. Ubben, and J. M. Veith, Cross-age study on secondary school students’ views of stars, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 19, 020165 (2023).
  61. R. S. Taylor and E. D. Grundstrom, Diagrammatic representational constraints of spatial scale in Earth-Moon system astronomy instruction, Astron. Educ. Rev. 10, 010104 (2011).
  62. I. Testa, S. Leccia, and E. Puddu, Astronomy textbook images: Do they really help students?, Phys. Educ. 49, 332 (2014).
  63. T. Fanetti, The relationships of scale concepts on college age students’ misconceptions about the cause of lunar phases Master’s thesis, Iowa State University, 2001, supervized by Willson, L.A. and Meltzer, D.E.
  64. D. S. Rudmann, Solving astronomy problems can be limited by intuited knowledge, spatial ability, or both, in Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, 2002), https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED468815.pdf.
  65. C. Türk, The correlation between pre-service science teachers’ astronomy achievement, attitudes towards astronomy and spatial thinking skills, J. Educ. Learn. 5, 187 (2016).
  66. H. Bekaert, H. Van Winckel, W. Van Dooren, A. Steegen, and M. De Cock, Design and validation of an instrument to test students’ understanding of the apparent motion of the Sun and stars, Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 16, 020135 (2020).
  67. R. Lindell and J. P. Olsen, Developing the lunar phases concept inventory,, Proceedings of the 2002 Physics Education Research Conference, Boise, ID (AIP, New York, 2007), 10.1119/perc.2002.pr.011.
  68. R. Lindell and S. R. Sommer, Using the lunar phases concept inventory to investigate college students’ pre-instructional mental models of lunar phases, AIP Conf. Proc. 720, 73 (2004)
  69. T. W. Science, The simple physics of the annular solar eclipse on December 26 (2019), https://science.thewire.in/the-sciences/theres-a-solar-eclipse-on-december-26-this-is-your-ultimate-guide/ [accessed October 28, 2025].
  70. F. Espenak, Solar eclipse basics [diagram/photo] (2024), https://www.eclipsewise.com/solar/SEhelp/SEbasics.html [accessed October 28, 2025].
  71. P. M. Sadler, Misconceptions in astronomy, in Proceedings of the Second International Seminar: Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, 1987), Vol. 3, pp. 422–425.
  72. M. Zeilik and V. J. Morris, An examination of misconceptions in an astronomy course for science, mathematics, and engineering majors, Astron. Educ. Rev. 2, 101 (2003).
  73. W. Bisard, R. Aron, M. Francek, and B. Nelson, Assessing selected physical science and earth science misconceptions of middle school through university preservice teachers, J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 24, 38 (1994).
  74. J. Mant, A survey of British primary school teachers’ understanding of the Earth’s place in the universe, Educ. Res. 37, 3 (1995).
  75. J. D. Plummer, P. Udomprasert, A. Vaishampayan, S. Sunbury, K. Cho, H. Houghton, E. Johnson, E. Wright, P. M. Sadler, and A. Goodman, Learning to think spatially through curricula that embed spatial training, J. Res. Sci. Teach. 59, 1134 (2022).
  76. W. Wundt, Beiträge Zur Theorie Der Sinneswahrnehmung (C. F. Winter’sche Verlagshandlung, Leipzig, 1862).
  77. G. H. Fisher, An experimental study of angular subtension., Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 21, 356 (1969).
  78. E. Hering and L. M. Hurvich, Outlines of a Theory of the Light Sense (Harvard university, Cambridge, MA, 1964).
  79. H. L. F. von Helmholtz and A. Gullstrand, Handbuch der Physiologischen Optik, 3rd ed. (Voss, Hamburg, 1909).
  80. S. Nundy, B. Lotto, D. Coppola, A. Shimpi, and D. Purves, Why are angles misperceived?, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 97, 5592 (2000).
  81. C. Q. Howe and D. Purves, Natural-scene geometry predicts the perception of angles and line orientation, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102, 1228 (2005).
  82. J. C. Baird, M. Wagner, and K. Fuld, A simple but powerful theory of the Moon illusion, J. Exp. Psychol. 16, 675 (1990).
  83. D. McCready, Moon illusions redescribed, Percept. Psychophys. 39, 64 (1986).
  84. F. Restle, Moon illusion explained on the basis of relative size, Science 167, 1092 (1970).
  85. P. Mayring, Qualitative Content Analysis: Theoretical Foundation, Basic Procedures and Software Solution (Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR), Klagenfurt, 2014), p. 143.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Phys. Educ. Res. 22, 020106– Published 5 August, 2026
  • Received 26 November 2025
  • Revised 5 May 2026
  • Accepted 4 May 2026
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