Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using Research Based Assessment Tools in Professional Development in Current Electricity

  • Published:
Journal of Science Teacher Education

We present a practical way of adapting and using four research-based assessments for different purposes in an electricity and magnetism course for K-8 science teachers. The course is designed to accomplish conceptual change toward accepted scientific conceptions as well as introducing teachers to materials and activities appropriate for their classrooms. Our data support that using the research-based tests to identify alternative conceptions and discuss test results with teachers is a promising way to use the knowledge of alternative conceptions in professional development. We also identify some mismatches between the research of conceptual change and its use in programs of professional development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Another widely accepted model which is not included here is the “unidirectional with sharing” model (Shipstone, 1984; Wandersee et al., 1994)

  2. There is an EMKS2 on magnetism which is not discussed here

  3. The background data are from the 16 teachers (2 dropped later) who took the pre-test survey

  4. In this bar diagram, we used results from the 16 teachers who attended the pre-test; while in comparing with the post-test in Figures 3 and 4, we only used results from the 12 teachers who attended both tests

  5. One alternative is different in the post-test: the term “two types of charges” in choice B, the correct answer, in pre-test was changed to “two types of magnetic poles” in post-test, hence the wrong answer for post-test. However, the level of difficulty is the same

  6. The corresponding numbers for question 8 and 9 in the pre-test are 6 and 7 in the post-test

  7. This result was used as a source for distracters in our EMKS-post-9

  8. But the “sharing model” in our sample is “directional,” different from the “unidirectional” one

References

  • Anderson, D., Lucas, K., Ginns, I., & Dierking, L. (2000). Development of knowledge about electricity and magnetism during a visit to a science museum and related post-visit activities. Science Education, 84(5), 658–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, R., Eylon, B., & Ganiel, M. (1983). Potential difference and current in simple electric circuits: A study of students’ concepts. American Journal of Physics, 51(5), 407–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delta Science Module. (1996). Magnets. Nashua, NH: Delta Education, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2–3), 105–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., & Pfundt, H. (2004). Bibliography–STCSE: Students’ and teachers’ conceptions and science education. Retrieved August 15, 2005 from http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html.

  • Dupin, J. J., & Johsua, S. (1989). Analogies and “modeling analogies” in teaching: Some examples in basic electricity. Science Education, 73(2), 207–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elementary Science Study. (1986). Batteries and bulbs. Hudson, NH: Delta Education, Inc.

  • Eylon, B., & Ganiel, U. (1990). Macro-micro relationship: The missing link between electrostatics and electrodynamics in students’ reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 12(1), 79–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredette, N. H., & Lochhead, J. (1980). Student conceptions of simple circuits. The Physics Teacher, 18(3), 194–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganiel, U. (2000). Linking electrostatics to electrodynamics, macro to micro: Student understanding of electric circuits. In X. Luo & K. Zhao (Eds.), Proceedings of the ‘99 international conference of physics teachers and educators (pp. 69–76). Guilin, China: Guangxi Normal University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, P., McMahon, A., & Wiegers, J. (2003). Hands-on current electricity: A professional development course. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15, 1–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halloun, I., & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53, 1043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haupt, G. W. (1952). Concepts of magnetism held by elementary school children. Science Education, 36, 162–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, L. C., & the Physics Education Group at the University of Washington. (1996). Physics by inquiry (Vols. 1–2). New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

  • Minstrell, J. (1982). Explaining the “at rest” condition of an object. The Physics Teacher, 20, 10–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minstrell, J. (1992, March). Facets of students’ knowledge and relevant instruction. In F. G. R. Duit & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies, proceedings of an international workshop (pp. 110–128). Bremen, Germany: IPN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2005). The show-me standards. Retrieved August 14, 2005 from http://dese.mo.gov/standards/.

  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Resources Center, Science and Technology for Children. (1991a). Electric circuits. Burlington, NC: Carolina Biological Supply Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Science Resources Center, Science and Technology for Children. (1991b). Magnets and motors. Burlington, NC: Carolina Biological Supply Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak J. (Ed.). (1983). The first proceedings of the misconceptions in science and mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak J. (Ed.). (1987). Proceedings of the second international seminar on misconceptions and educational strategies in science and mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novak J. (Ed.). (1993). Proceedings of the third international seminar on misconceptions and educational strategies in science and mathematics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University. (distributed electronically).

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R. (1981). Children’s ideas about electric current. New Zealand Science Teacher, 29, 12–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R. (1982). Bridging the gap between teaching and learning. New Zealand: Hamilton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children’s ideas about electric current. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1(1), 73–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R., & Gilbert, J. (1979). Investigating understanding of basic concepts using an interview-about-instances techniques. Research in Science Education, 9, 85–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J., Kim, I., Kim, M., & Lee, M. (2001). Analysis of students’ processes of confirmation and falsification of their prior ideas about electrostatics. International Journal of Science Education, 23(12), 1219–1236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Redish, E. F. (2004). A theoretical framework for physics education research: Modeling student thinking. In E. F. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the international school of physics “Enrico Fermi” course CLVI. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, T. (1980). Children’s understanding of simple electric circuits. In T. Russsell & A.P.C. Sia (Eds.), Science and mathematics concept learning of south east asian children, second report on phase (pp. 67–91). Glugar, Malaysia: SEAMEO-RECSAM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, P., & McDermott, L. (1992). Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. part ii: design of instructional strategies. American Journal of Physics, 60(11), 1003–1013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, J., Gibbons, P., Wiegers, J., & McMahon, A. (2005, April). A framework of a professional development program for k-8 science teachers. In Proceedings of the national association for research in science teaching 2005.

  • Shepardson, D. P., & Moje, E. B. (1994). The nature of fourth graders’ understandings of electric circuits. Science Education, 78(5), 489–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shipstone, D. M. (1984). A study of children’s understanding of electricity in simple dc circuits. European Journal of Science Education, 6(2), 185–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shipstone, D. M. (1988). Pupils’ understanding of simple electrical circuits – some implications for instruction. Physics Education, 23, 92–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thacker, B., Ganiel, U., & Boys, D. (1999). Macroscopic phenomena and microscopic processes: Student understanding of transients in direct current electric circuits. American Journal of Physics, 67(7), 525–531.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiberghien, A., & Delacote, G. (1976). Manipulations representations de circuits electrique sample chex les enfants de 7 a 12 ans. Review Francais de Pedagogie, 34, 32–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J., & Novak, J. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, a project of the national science teachers association (pp. 177–21). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technology Enhanced Learning in Science (TELS), 4407 Tolman Hall, School of Education, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 94720, U.S.A.

    Ji Shen

  2. Department of Physics, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, U.S.A.

    Patrick C. Gibbons

  3. Science Outreach, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, U.S.A.

    John F. Wiegers & Ann P. McMahon

Authors
  1. Ji Shen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrick C. Gibbons
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John F. Wiegers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ann P. McMahon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ji Shen.

Appendices

Appendix A: EMKS1

Electric and Magnetic Knowledge Survey—Pre-1 (EMKS1)

  1. 1.

    You may have experienced phenomena as follows: (1) when you tear off some plastic wrap from its roll, the wrap is attracted to anything that gets close; (2) Styrofoam peanuts cling to your arms when you unpack a box full of them; (3) running a comb through your hair on a dry day causes the comb to attract your hair. These phenomena are caused by (1)_______ (2)_______ (3)_______

    1. A.

      Stickiness of the materials produced by the friction

    2. B.

      Gravitational Force

    3. C.

      Electrical Force

    4. D.

      Magnetic Force

    5. E.

      Other (please specify)

  2. 2.

    Chose the correct statement(s) below:

    1. A.

      There are three types of charges: positive charge, negative charge and neutral charge.

    2. B.

      There are two types of charges: positive charge and negative charge.

    3. C.

      There is only one type of charge which really works: electron.

    4. D.

      There are many types of charges: electron, proton, neutron, α, β, π, τ....

    5. E.

      None of the above is correct.

  3. 3.

    When a rubber rod (see the picture) is brought close to a pith ball suspended from a thin wire, the pith ball is first attracted to the rod, touched it and then repelled by the rod. Chose the correct prediction(s) below, for the situation before the pith ball touched the rod.

    1. A.

      The rubber rod is negatively charged.

    2. B.

      The rubber rod is positively charged.

    3. C.

      The rubber rod is neutral.

    4. D.

      All the statements above are possible.

    5. E.

      None of the statements above is possible.

  4. 4.

    Which set-up(s) below do you think will light the bulb? Only one bulb, one cell and some wires are used.

    • A. B. C. D. E.

  1. 5.

    In the circuit below, three identical bulbs are connected in series and light up. Choose the correct statement(s).

    1. A.

      The direction of the current is L1 → L2 → L3.

      • L1 is most bright.

    2. B.

      The direction of the current is L3 → L2 → L1.

      • L3 is most bright.

    3. C.

      The direction of the current is L1 → L2 → L3.

      • L2 is most bright.

      • L2 is most bright.

    4. D.

      The direction of the current is L1 → L2 → L3. They have the same brightness.

    5. E.

      The direction of the current is L3 → L2 → L1. They have the same brightness.

  1. 6.

    In an activity that students are given a simple battery, a small bulb with a bulb holder, and some wires, some students decide to use two batteries to see what will happen. Their circuits are set up as below. In which one(s) do you think that the bulb will light?

    • A. B. C. D. E.

  1. 7.

    The electricity supply to our home is a voltage source of 110 volts. Two light bulbs are connected to this source in series. Both are designed for use with the domestic voltage, one for 15 W and the other for 150 W. Consequently: (from Cohen et al., 1983)

    1. A.

      The 15 W bulb will light almost normally, while the 150 W bulb will hardly light at all.

    2. B.

      The 15 W bulb will light dimly, the 150 W will light strongly.

    3. C.

      Both bulbs will light dimly.

    4. D.

      The 15 W bulb will burn out.

    5. E.

      Don’t know.

  2. 8.

    In the circuit given in the figure, two identical bulbs (A and B) connected in parallel light with the same brightness. The cell is regarded as having no internal resistance. Now we remove bulb B, consequently:

    1. A.

      The bulb A will light dimmer.

      • The current at point C will decrease.

    2. B.

      The bulb A will light brighter.

      • The current at point C will increase.

    3. C.

      The bulb A will light brighter.

      • The current at point C will keep the same.

    4. D.

      The bulb A will light roughly the same as before.

      • The current at point C will keep the same.

    5. E.

      The bulb A will light roughly the same as before.

      • The current at point C will decrease.

  1. 9.

    In the circuit given below, two identical bulbs (A and B) are lighted. An additional bulb C is connected in parallel with bulb B.

    • Consequently, the brightness of bulb A will increase/keep the same/decrease. (circle one answer) And the brightness of bulb B will increase/keep the same/decrease. (circle one answer). State your reasoning:

    • (If you don’t know potential difference, skip the rest part of this problem.)

    • The potential difference between M and N will increase/keep the same/decrease. (circle one answer). Why do you think so?

  1. 10.

    We can use symbols to represent different components in an electrical circuit as below.

    • For example, the electrical diagram (left) represents the set up (right).

    • Can you draw an electrical diagram to represent a circuit which contains two batteries, two bulbs, one piece of nichrome wire (resistor), one switch, and some wires. And the connections are as

      1. (1)

        the nichrome wire (resistor) and one bulb are connected in parallel

      2. (2)

        the other bulb is connected in series with the combination of (1)

      3. (3)

        the batteries are connected in series

      4. (4)

        the switch controls the entire circuit.

Appendix B: ECNT

Electrical Circuit Notion Test (ECNT) (Adapted from Shipstone, 1984)

  1. 1.

    In the circuit above, five identical bulbs (L1, L2, L3, L4, L5) are connected in series. Please indicate the direction of the current at the circuit, then put in order the relative brightness of 5 bulbs. Explain your reasoning.

  1. 2.

    This circuit above contains three identical bulbs (L1, L2, L3). Answer the following questions:

    • If we take out L1 and connect the wires that went into it, will the brightness of the bulb L2 increase/decrease/stay the same (circle one). Why do you think so?

    • If we take out L3 and connect the wires that went into it, will the brightness of the bulb L2 increase/decrease/stay the same (circle one). Why do you think so?

    • If we add an additional bulb L4 in series between L1 and L2, will the brightness of the bulb L2 increase/decrease/stay the same (circle one). Why do you think so?

    • If we add an additional bulb L4 in series between L3 and L2, will the brightness of the bulb L2 increase/decrease/stay the same (circle one). Why do you think so?

  1. 3.

    In the circuit above, three identical bulbs are connected as follows: L2 and L3 are in parallel, L1 is in series with both L2 and L3. If we add another bulb L4 in series with L3, the brightness of the bulb L2 will increase/decrease/stay the same. (circle one) Explain your choice.

Appendix C: EMKS-post

Electric and Magnetic Knowledge Survey (Post)

  1. 1.
    1. a.

      Will magnets pick up all the metals? YES / NO (Circle one)

    2. b.

      Can you list some of elementary school students’ responses about why magnets can pick up some objects?

    3. c.

      How will you deal with their responses?

  2. 2.

    Chose the correct statement(s) below:

    1. A.

      There are three types of charges: positive charge, negative charge and neutral charge.

    2. B.

      There are two types of magnetic poles: positive and negative.

    3. C.

      There is only one type of charge which really works: electron.

    4. D.

      There are many types of charges: electron, proton, neutron, α, β, π, τ...

    5. E.

      None of the above is correct

  3. 3.

    Same as EMKS1-3

  4. 4.

    Same as EMKS1-4 (except choice A in EMKS1 is removed and one more choice, “none of the above”, is added.)

  5. 5.

    Same as EMKS1-7

  6. 6.

    Same as EMKS1-8 (except the direction of the poles of the battery is switched)

  7. 7.

    Same as EMKS1-9

  8. 8.

    Same as EMKS1-10 (Same figure as ECNT-3)

  9. 9.

    In the circuit above, three identical bulbs, L1, L2 and L3, are connected as shown. If we add another bulb L4 in series with L3, the brightness of the bulb L2 will

    1. A.

      Stay the Same: In parallel connection, change in one branch won’t affect the other braches.

    2. B.

      Decrease: A change downstream won’t affect the parts upstream. But a change upstream will affect the parts downstream.

    3. C.

      Decrease: Bulbs are “sharing” the current. Fewer bulbs in a circuit will result more brightness of each bulb. More bulbs in a circuit will result less brightness of each bulb.

    4. D.

      Decrease: More current will go to the part needing more. (Here, the branch of L3, L4 needs more.)

    5. E.

      None of the above. Please explain:

  10. 10.

    Please draw a concept map of your understanding about the major concepts of electricity and magnetism and the relationship between these major concepts.

About this article

Cite this article

Shen, J., Gibbons, P.C., Wiegers, J.F. et al. Using Research Based Assessment Tools in Professional Development in Current Electricity. J Sci Teacher Educ 18, 431–459 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9061-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9061-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation