A Statistical Analysis of Misconceptions Regarding Challenging Concepts in Chapter One of the 10th-Grade Physics Textbook

Bahrami, Omid

doi:10.48310/esip.2025.21195.1023

A Statistical Analysis of Misconceptions Regarding Challenging Concepts in Chapter One of the 10th-Grade Physics Textbook

Document Type : Original Paper

Author

omid bahrami

Department of Physics Education, Farhangian University, P.O. Box 14665-889, Tehran, Iran.

10.48310/esip.2025.21195.1023

Abstract

This study aimed to investigate and analyze the misconceptions among 10th-grade students regarding fundamental physics concepts, including physical phenomena, scientific modeling, the distinction between laws and principles, scalar and vector quantities, the accuracy of measuring instruments, units, and density. The statistical population consisted of 85 tenth-grade students from the Experimental Sciences and Mathematics-Physics majors, selected through cluster random sampling. Data were collected using an 8-question questionnaire with a reliability coefficient of 0.91 (Cronbach's alpha). The findings revealed that over 50% of students had misconceptions in understanding modeling, distinguishing laws from principles, and identifying scalar and vector quantities. Approximately 45% showed misconceptions in the concepts of density, measurement accuracy, and physical phenomena, while about 30% had misconceptions regarding units. These results highlight the necessity of revising teaching methods and employing concrete examples to address these misunderstandings. To address these misconceptions, the study concludes with recommendations regarding teaching methods, the use of diverse learning styles, and the application of specific examples.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Teacher Education

References

[1] Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30(3), 141–158.

[2] Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2008). International handbook of research on conceptual change. Routledge.

[3] Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163.

[4] Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4(1), 45-69.

[5] Chi, M. T. H. (2008). Three types of conceptual change: Belief revision, mental model transformation, and categorical shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 61-82). Routledge.

[6] Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5(1), 61-84.

[7] Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 535-585.

[8] Hammer, D. (1996). More than misconceptions: Multiple perspectives on student knowledge and reasoning, and an appropriate role for education research. American Journal of Physics, 64(10), 1316-1325.

[9] Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241-1257.

[10] Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671-688.

[11] Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.

[12] Halloun, I., & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1043-1055.

[13] Thong, W.M., & Gunstone, R. (2008). Some student conceptions of electromagnetic induction. Research in Science Education, 38(1), 31-44.

[14] National Research Council. (2012). *A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas*. National Academies Press.

[15] Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Open University Press.

[16] Etkina, E., & Van Heuvelen, A. (2007). Investigative science learning environment: Using the processes of science and cognitive strategies to learn physics. American Journal of Physics, 75(7), 656-662.

[17] Gouvea, J. S., & Passmore, C. (2017). 'Models of' versus 'Models for'. Science & Education, 26(1-2), 49-63.

[18] Schwarz, C. V., et al. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632-654.

[19] McComas, W. F. (2003). The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. Springer.

[20] Arriassecq, I., & Greca, I. M. (2012). A teaching–learning sequence for the special relativity theory at high school level. Science & Education, 21(6), 827-851.

[21] Mari, L., Maul, A., Irribarra, D. T., & Wilson, M. (2017). Quantities, quantification, and the necessary and sufficient conditions for measurement. Measurement, 100, 115-121.

[22] Allie, S., Buffler, A., Campbell, B., & Lubben, F. (1998). First-year physics students' perceptions of the quality of experimental measurements. International Journal of Science Education, 20(4), 447-459.

[23] Becker, J. P., & Rivera, F. (2006). Middle school students' understanding of significant digits and uncertainty in measurement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(1), 53-72.

[24] Kaminski, J. A., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2012). Representation and transfer in the development of measurement concepts. Cognitive Development, 27(1), 1-17.

[25] Smith, K. J., & Metz, P. A. (1996). Exploring the relationship between misconception and conceptual change in learning density. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(2), 223-246.

[26] Liu, X., & Lesniak, K. (2006). Progression in children's understanding of the matter concept from elementary to high school. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(3), 320-347.

[27] CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (2023). Section 3: Physical Constants of Organic Compounds.

[28] International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam (IAPWS). (2016). Revised Release on the IAPWS Formulation 1995 for the Thermodynamic Properties of Ordinary Water Substance for General and Scientific Use.

[29] Lide, D. R. (Ed.). (2022). CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics (103rd ed.) Section 5: Thermochemistry, Electrochemistry, and Solution Chemistry.

[30] Bettin, H., & Spieweck, F. (1990). The Density of Sucrose Solutions as a Function of Concentration and Temperature. PTB-Mitteilungen, 100(3), 195-200.

[31] Kell, G. S. (1975). Density, Thermal Expansivity, and Compressibility of Liquid Water from 0° to 150°C. Journal of Chemical and Engineering Data, 20(1), 97-105.

[32] Perry's Chemical Engineers' Handbook (9th ed.). (2018). Section 2: Physical and Chemical Data. McGraw-Hill Education.

[33] Potvin, P., & Hasni, A. (2014). Analysis of the relationship between interest and conceptual understanding in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 36(13), 2221-2241.

[34] Duit, R., & Treagust, D.F. (2012). How can conceptual change contribute to theory and practice in science education? In B.J. Fraser et al. (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 107-118). Springer.