Abstract
This study established whether 12 South African secondary school physics students had incorrect conceptions of basic magnetism and if they had, to what extent they consistently applied such conceptions. Different scenarios in the form of thought experiments were presented in a clinical interview approach. A complex systems perspective underpinned the study and was firstly used to analyze 12 students’ conceptions in terms of intuitive fragments of knowledge elements, structured misconceptions, and theory-like system of knowledge elements. Secondly, coherence in each student’s ideas expressed across ten themes using thought experiments was analyzed in an effort to determine variations or coherence in responses. Examples of student explanations and sketches are discussed in the paper to illustrate the conceptual structures they applied. Most of the students in this study used a variety of knowledge elements in accord with a complex systems perspective, but three students seemed to prefer a specific perspective. One student’s ideas tended to be mainly fragmented, a second exposed a number of structured misconceptions, while another student’s reasoning can be described as a theory-like system of knowledge elements. Accordingly, the emphasis of physics education research should no longer be on the compilation of a list of misconceptions that have to be remedied or replaced, but on the conceptual connections, students make and their associative reasoning patterns (i.e., knowledge systems revealed). It remains for the teacher to use the complex systems perspective as a framework to facilitate students’ conceptual development and understanding, proceeding on their existing knowledge systems.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Asghar, A. A., & Libarkin, J. C. (2010). Gravity, magnetism, and ‘down:’ non-physics college students’ conceptions of gravity. The Science Educator, 19(1), 42–55.
Bar, V., Zinn, B., & Rubin, E. (1997). Children’s ideas about action at a distance. International Journal of Science Education, 19(10), 1137–1157.
Borges, A. T., & Gilbert, J. K. (1998). Models of magnetism. International Journal of Science Education, 20(3), 361–387.
Brophy, J., & Alleman, J. (2002). Primary-grade students’ knowledge and thinking about the economics of meeting families’ shelter needs. American Educational Research Journal, 39(2), 423–468.
Brown, D. E. (2014). Students’ conceptions as dynamically emergent structures. Science and Education, 23, 1463–1483.
Burgoon, J. N., Heddle, M. L., & Duran, E. (2010). Re-examining the similarities between teacher and student conceptions about physical science. The Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 101–114.
Cheng, M., & Brown, D. E. (2010). Conceptual resources in self-developed explanatory models: the importance of integrating conscious and intuitive knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 2367–2392.
Clement, J. (2000). Analysis of clinical interviews: foundations and model viability. Handbook of research design in mathematics and Science Education, 547–589.
Confrey, J. (1990). A review of the research on student conceptions in mathematics, science, and programming. Review of Research in Education, 6, 3–56.
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Dega, B. G., Kriek, J., & Mogese, T. F. (2013). Categorization of alternative conceptions in electricity and magnetism: the case of Ethiopian undergraduate students. Research in Science Education, 43, 1819–1915.
Department of Basic Education. (2011). Curriculum and policy statement (CAPS), further education and training phase, physical sciences, Grade 10–12. Pretoria: Department of Basic Education.
DiSessa, A. A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2and3), 105–225.
DiSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N., & Esterly, J. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28(6), 843–900.
Duit, R. (2009). Bibliography STCSE: students’ and teachers’ conceptions and science education. Retrieved from http://www.if.ufrj.br/~marta/aprendizagememfisica/fv09.pdf.
Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1–38.
Greca, I. M., & Morreira, M. A. (2002). Mental, physical, and mathematical models in the teaching and learning of physics. Science Education, 1, 106–121.
Guisasola, J., Almudi, J. M., & Zubimendi, J. L. (2004). Difficulties in learning the introductory magnetic field theory in the first years of university. Science Education, 88(3), 443–464.
Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, 68(7PER Suppl), S52–S59.
Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. Journal of the learning sciences, 12, 53–90.
Harrer, B. W., Flood, V. J., & Witman, M. (2013). Productive resources in students’ ideas about energy: an alternative analysis of Watts’ original interview transcripts. Physical Review Special Topics – Physics Education Research, 9(023101), 1–5.
Hekkenberg, A., Lemmer, M., & Dekkers, P. P. J. (2015). An analysis of teachers’ concept confusion concerning electric and magnetic fields. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(1), 34–44.
Hickey, R., & Schibeci, R. A. (1999). The attraction of magnetism. Physics Education, 34(6), 383–388.
Kelder, K. (2008) Physical sciences, grade 10 learner’s book. 2nd edition. Cambridge University Press.
Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs and graphing: tasks, learning and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60(1), 1–64.
Lemmer, M. (2013). Nature, cause and effect of students’ intuitive conceptions regarding changes in velocity. International Journal of Science Education, 35(2), 239–261.
Maree, K. (2010). First steps in research. Pretoria: Van Schaik Publishers.
Mevarech, Z. R., & Kramarsky, B. (1997). From verbal descriptions to graphic representations: stability and change in students’ alternative conceptions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 32, 229–263.
Meyer, K. (1991). Children as experimenters: elementary students’ actions in an experimental context with magnets (Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia). Retrieved from https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/831/items/1.0055294.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211–227.
Ravanis, K., Christidou, V., & Hatzinikita, V. (2013). Enhancing conceptual change in preschool children’s representations of light: a sociocognitive approach. Research in Science Education, 43, 2257–2276.
Redish, E.F. (2004). A theoretical framework for physics education research: modeling student thinking. In E.F. Redish andM. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the international school of physics, “Enrico Fermi”course clvi (pp. 1–65).
Redish, E. F., & Kuo, E. (2015). Language of physics, language of math: disciplinary culture and dynamic epistemology. Science and Education, 24, 561–590.
Saglam, M., & Millar, R. (2006). Upper high school students’ understanding of electromagnetism. International Journal of Science Education, 28(5), 543–566.
Tanel, Z., & Erol, M. (2008). Students’ difficulties in understanding the concepts of magnetic field strength, magnetic flux density, and magnetization. Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 2(3), 184–191.
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45–69.
Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2008). International handbook of research on conceptual change. New York: Routledge.
Vosniadou, S., & Skopeliti, I. (2014). Conceptual change from the framework theory side of the fence. Science and Education, 23, 1427–1445.
White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.
Funding
This work was supported by South Africa Netherlands research Programme on Alternatives in Development (SANPAD) under Grant 10_39.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lemmer, M., Kriek, J. & Erasmus, B. Analysis of Students’ Conceptions of Basic Magnetism from a Complex Systems Perspective. Res Sci Educ 50, 375–392 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9693-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9693-z