Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Examining Knowledge Levels of High School Students Related to Conductors at Electrostatic Equilibrium and Electric Field Lines Using the Drawing Method

  • Published:
Research in Science Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate knowledge of high school students related to conductors at electrostatic equilibrium and electric field lines. The descriptive model was preferred in line with the purpose of the study. The sample of the study consisted of 35 11th grade students, 18 females and 16 males, who were enrolled in a state-owned high school in Turkey. The participants had previously learned the electric field lines in their courses. The research data was collected using a drawing scale consisting of three sections prepared by the researchers. The students then were asked to explain their drawings. Descriptive analysis was applied to the answers of the students. According to the findings obtained from the analysis, the most commonly reflected property of electric field lines was “electric field lines do not intersect,” while the least commonly reflected property was “electric field lines are drawn parallel to the surface.” Also, the students were observed to confuse the concept of the electric field with electric current, and electric field lines with magnetic field lines. In addition, it was found that the students did not understand the direction of the electric field and the vectorial nature of the electric field, and believed that electric field lines were real. The knowledge of the students was not based on scientific foundations.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
€32.70 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Finland)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acar, B., & Tarhan, L. (2008). Effects of cooperative learning on students’ understanding of metallic bonding. Research in Science Education, 38, 401–420.

    Google Scholar 

  • Akdeniz, A. R., Bektas, I., & Yigit, N. (2000). İlköğretim 8. sınıf öğrencilerinin temel fizik kavramlarını anlama düzeyi (Level of comprehension of basic physics concepts of 8th grade primary school students). Hacettepe University Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 19, 5–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayas, A. (2006). Kavram öğrenimi, fen ve teknoloji öğretimi [Concept learning, science and technology teaching]. Ankara: Pegema Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bak, Z., Ayas, A., & Devecioğlu, Y. (2005). Ogretmen adaylarinda isi ve sicaklikla ilgili kavram yanilgilarinin belirlenmesi (Determination of conceptual information about temperature and temperature in teacher candidates). XIV. Ulusal Egitim Bilimleri Kongresi, II, 197–202.

  • Bilal, E., & Erol, M. (2009). Investigating students’ conceptions of some electricity concepts. Latin American Journal of Physics Education, 3(2), 193–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohigas, X., & Periago, C. (2010). Modelos mentales alternativos de los alumnos de segundo curso de ingeniería sobre la Ley de Coulomb y el Campo Eléctrico [Alternative mental models of second-year engineering students of Coulomb’s law and the electric field]. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 12(1). Retrieved from http://redie.uabc.mx/vol12no1/contenido-bohigas.html. Accessed 27 Nov 2016.

  • Bradamente F, Michelini M., & Stefanel A. (2007). Learning problems related to the concept of field. In: Proc. Int. Symp. on the Frontiers of Fundamental and Computational Physics. The Netherlands, Italy: Springer.

  • Chabay, R. W., & Sherwood, B. A. (2000). Matter & interactions II: Electric and magnetic interactions. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Chen, A. K., & Kwen, B. H. (2005). Primary pupils’ conceptions about someaspect of electricity. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/98pap/ang98205.htlm. Accessed 13 Jul 2017.

  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design. Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R. (1993). Research on student’s conceptions-developments and trends. Third International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics. Ithaca: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duit, R., & Rhoneck, C. (1997). Learning and understanding key concepts of electricity. Retrieved from http//www.physics.ohio-state.edu/jossem/ICPE/C2MC.htlm. Accessed 20 Sept 2015.

  • Dunn, J. W., & Barbanel, J. (2000). One model for an integrated math/physics course focusing on electricity and magnetism and related calculus topics. American Journal of Physics, 68, 749–757.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Feymann, R., Leighton, R., & Sands, M. (2016). Feynman fizik dersleri (Feynman physics course). Istanbul: Alfa Puslishing.

  • Furió, C., & Guisasola, J. (1998). Difficulties in learning the concept of electric field. Science Education, 82(4), 511–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Furió, C., Guisasola, J., & Zubimendi, J. L. (1998). Problemas hist’oricos y dificultades de aprendizaje en la interpretaci’on newtoniana de fen’omenos electrost’aticos considerados elementales [Historical problems and learning difficulties in the Newtonian interpretation of electrostatic phenomena considered elementary]. Investiga¸coes em Ensino de Ciˆencias, 3(3). Retrieved from http://www.if.ufrgs.br/public/ensino/vol3/n3/v3_n3_a2.htm. Accessed 13 Jul 2017.

  • Furió, C., Guisasola, J., Almudí, J., & Ceberio, M. (2003). Learning the electric field concept as oriented research activity. Science Education, 87(5), 640–662.

  • Garza, A., & Zabala, G. (2010). Electric field concept: effect of the context and the type of questions. Physics education research conference (pp. 145–148). Portland: AIP Conf. Proc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: SagePublications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guisasola, J. (1997). El trabajo cient’ıfico y las tareas en la electrost’atica en textos de Bachillerato [Scientific work and tasks in electrostatics in high school texts]. Alambique, 11, 45–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hekkenberg, A., Lemmer, M., & Dekkers, P. (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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hestenes, D. (1996). Modeling methodology for physics teachers. In Proceedings of the international conference on undergraduate physics education. College Park. Retrieved from http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/ModelingMeth-jul98.pdf. Accessed 10 Oct 2008.

  • Hestenes, D., & Wells, M. (1992). A mechanics baseline test. The Physics Teacher, 30, 159–1162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kesonen, M. H. P., Asikainen, M. A., & Hirvonen, P. E. (2011). University students’ conceptions of the electric and magnetic fields and their interrelationships. European Journal of Physics, 32(2), 521–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koch, T. (2006). Establishing rigour in qualitative research: the decision trail. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(1), 91–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kose, S. (2008). Diagnosing student misconceptions: using drawings as a research method. World Applied Sciences Journal, 3, 283–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maloney, D. P., O’Kuma, T. L., Hieggelke, C. J., & Van Heuvelen, A. (2001). Surveying students’ conceptual knowledge of electricity and magnetism. American Journal of Physcis, 69(S1), S12–S23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martín, J., & Solbes, J. D. (2001). Diseño y Evaluación de una propuesta para la enseñanza del concepto campo en física [Design and evaluation of a proposal for teaching the concept of field in physics]. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 19(3), 393–403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Melo-Niño, L., Cañada, F., & Mellado, V. (2017). Initial characterization of Colombian high school physics teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge on electric fields. Research in Science Education, 47(1), 25–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thou-sand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, N. L., & Meltzer, D. E. (2003). Initial understanding of vector concepts among students in introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 71, 630–638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Osbeck, L. M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2006). The distribution of representation. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 36(2), 141–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ozay, E., & Oztas, H. (2003). Secondary students’ interpretations of photosynthesis and plant nutrition. Journal of Biological Education, 37, 68–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Planinic, M. (2006). Assessment of difficulties of some conceptual areas from electricity and magnetism using the conceptual survey of electricity and magnetism. American Journal of Physics, 74, 1143–1148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocovi, M. C. (2007). The effects of a history-based instructional material on the students’ understanding of field lines. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 107–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocovi, M. C., & Finley, F. (2003). Historical evolution of the field view and textbook accounts. Science Education, 12, 387–396.

    Google Scholar 

  • Povoci, M. C., & Finley, F. (2002). Lines of force: Faraday’s and students’ views. Science Education, 11, 459–474.

    Google Scholar 

  • Povoci, M. C., & Finley, F. (2007). The effects of a history-based instructionalmaterial on the students’ understanding of field lines. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 107–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prokop, P., & Fancovicová, J. (2006). Students’ ideas about the human body: do they really draw what they know? Journal of Baltic Science Education, 2(10), 86–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rennie, L. J., & Jarvis, T. (1995). Childrens choice of drawings to communicate their ideas about technology. Research in Science Education, 25(3), 239–252.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, M. J., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2001). Students’ understandings of human organs and organ systems. Research in Science Education, 31(3), 383–399.

  • Reiss, M. J., Tunnicliffe, S. D., Andersen, A. M., Bartoszeck, A., Carvalho, G. S., Chen, S. Y., et al. (2002). An international study ofyoung peoples’ drawings of what is inside themselves. Journal of Biological Education, 36(2), 58–64.

  • Saarelainen, M., Laaksonen, A., & Hirvonen, P. E. (2007). Students’ initial knowledge of electric and magnetic fields—more profound explanations and reasoning models for undesired conceptions. European Journal of Physics, 28, 51–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saarelainen, M., Laaksone, A., & Hirvomen, P. E. (2009). Designing a teaching sequence for electrostatics at undergraduate level by using educational reconstruction. Latin American Journal of Physics Education, 3(3), 518–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sahin, C., Ipek, H., & Ayas, A., (2008). Student understanding of light concept primary schools: a cross-age study. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 9(1), Art:7.

  • Sandoval, M., & Mora, C. D. (2009). Modelos erróneos sobre la comprensión del campo eléctrico en estudiantes universitariosm [Erroneus models about the understanding of the electric field in university students]. Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 3(3), 647–655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Acher, A., Fortus, D., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sonmez, V., & Alacapınar, F. G. (2011). Orneklendirilmiş bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Selected scientific research methods]. Ankara: Anı Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stocklmayer, S. M., & Treagust, D. F. (1994). A historical analysis of electric currents in textbook: a century of influence in physics education. Science and Education, 3, 131–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strube, P. (1988). The presentation of energy and fields in physics texts: a case of literary inertia. Physics Education, 23, 366–371.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, G. V., & Silk, A. M. J. (1990). An introduction to the psychology of children’s drawings. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheat Sheaf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thong, W. M., & Gunstone, R. (2008). Some conceptions of electromagnetic induction. Research in Science Education, 38, 31–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Törnkvist, S., Petterson, K. A., & Transtömer, G. (1993). Confusion by representation: on students’ comprehension of the electric field concept. American Journal of Physics, 61, 335–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uzunkavak, M. (2009). Ogrencilerin is kavramında pozitiflik-negatiflik ayrimi becerilerinin yazi ve cizim metoduyla ortaya çıkarilmasi [Revealing dicrimination skills of students between positive and negative work by writing and drawing method]. SDU International Journal of Technologic Sciences, 1(2), 10–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velazco, S., & Salinas, J. D. (2001). Comprensión de los Conceptos de Campo, Energía y Potencial Eléctricos y Magnéticos en Estudiantes Universitarios [Understanding the concepts of electric and magnetic field, energy, and potential in university students]. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Física, 23(3), 308–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viennot, L., & Raison, S. (1992). Students’ reasoning about the superposition of electric fields. International Journal of Science Education, 14, 475–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Viennot, L., & Raison, S. (1999). Design and evaluation of a research-based teaching sequence: the superposition of electric fields. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yildirim, A., & Simsek, H. (2005). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yontemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Ankara: Seckin Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: epistemological, theoretical and methodological differences. European Journal of Education, 48(2), 311–325.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gazi Education Faculty, Department of Mathematics and Science Education, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey

    Tuğba Taşkın & Pervin Ünlü Yavaş

Authors
  1. Tuğba Taşkın
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pervin Ünlü Yavaş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tuğba Taşkın.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix: Electric Field Lines Drawing Scale

Appendix: Electric Field Lines Drawing Scale

Section 1

Please write the properties of charged conductors at electrostatic equilibrium.

figure a

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Taşkın, T., Yavaş, P.Ü. Examining Knowledge Levels of High School Students Related to Conductors at Electrostatic Equilibrium and Electric Field Lines Using the Drawing Method. Res Sci Educ 51, 577–597 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9808-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-018-9808-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation