Learners’ prevalent misconceptions about force and experiences of flipped classes

Abstract

Misconceptions challenge science learning. This study investigated Grade eleven learners’ prevalent misconceptions about force using Force Concept Inventory (FCI) and learners’ experiences of using flipped class. The sample comprised 190 learners for FCI and 14 learners for Focus Group Discussions (FGD). A quasi-experimental design using Experimental Group (EG), which was taught using Flipped classes and Control Group (CG) taught using Talk and Chalk method (TCM). Descriptive statistics, concentration analysis, t-test and thematic analysis were used to analyse data. Results show an 81.8% prevalence of misconceptions in seven categories. The most common patterns of misconceptions were Low and Low (LL) and Low and Medium (LM), while the least included Medium and Medium (MM). Two themes emerged from FGD: interesting learning about Isaac Newton's background and identifying their incoherent knowledge of the force. It suggests that using flipped classes minimised misconceptions and created interest in science for gifted and less gifted learners, which resulted in improved learners’ performance

Keywords

• Force Concept Inventory
• flipped classes
• minimised misconceptions
• interest
• improved performance

Supporting Institution

University of Limpopo

Project Number

N/A

Thanks

Thanks to all who will review the work

References

1. Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life: evidence-based practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
2. Agyei, D. D. (2021). Integrating ICT into schools in Sub-Saharan Africa: from teachers’ capacity building to classroom implementation. Education and Information Technologies, 26(1), 125-144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10253-w
3. Bao, L., & Redish, E. (2001). Concentration analysis: a quantitative assessment of student states. American Journal of Physics, 69, 45-53. Doi. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.1371253
4. Bekkink, M. O., Rogier-Donders, A. R. T., Kooloos, J. G., de Waal, R. M., & Ruiter, D. J. (2016). Uncovering students’ misconceptions by assessment of their written questions BMC Medical Education BMC series – open, inclusive and trusted 16, 221, http//www.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-016-0739-5.
5. Bergman, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/Publications/Books/Overview/Flip-Your-Classroom.aspx.
6. Cagande, J.L.L & Jugar, R.R. (2018). The flipped classroom and college physics students’ motivation and understanding of kinematics graphs. Issues in Educational Research, 28(2), 288-307.
7. Chew, S. L. (2005). Student misconceptions in the psychology classroom. Essays from excellence in teaching. Retrieved from http://teachpsych.org/resources/e-books/eit2009 /eit2009.
8. Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design (3rd. ed.). London: Sage.

9. Denzin, N. K. (2012). Triangulation. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 6(2), 80-88.
10. Department of Basic Education, (2012). National diagnostic report on learner performance, 2012. South Africa: National Department of Basic Education. Retrieved May 12, 2107, from http://www. education .gov.za Department of Basic Education, (2014). National diagnostic report on learner performance, 2014. South Africa: National Department of Basic Education. Retrieved from http://www. education.gov.za
11. Dudu, W. T., & Vhurumuku, E. (2012). Teachers' practices of inquiry when teaching investigations: A case study. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(6), 579-600. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9287-y
12. Ehlers, V. J., King, L. J., & Ziyani, I. S. (2004). Using triangulation of research methods to investigate family planning practice in Swaziland. African Journal of Nursing and Midwifery, 6(1), 12-17. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/7008
13. Furqani, D., Feranie, S., & Winarno, N. (2018). The Effect of Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) Strategy on Students' Conceptual Mastery and Critical Thinking in Learning Vibration and Wave. Journal of science learning, 2(1), 1-8.
14. Gavin-Doxas, K., & Klymkowsky, M. W. (2008). Recognising student misconceptions through Ed’s tool and the Biology Concept Inventory. PLoS Biology, 6(1), 14-17. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060003
15. Gonzales, P., Guzmán, J. C., Partelow, L., Pahlke, E., Jocelyn, L., Kastenberg, D., & Williams, T. (2004). Highlights from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2003 (NCES 2005-005). U.S. Department of Education, National Centre for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
16. Handhika, J., Huriawati, F., & Fitriani, N. (2017). Force concept inventory (FCI) representation of high school students (SMA & MA). Journal of Physics: Theories and Applications, 1(1), 29-34. doi 10.20961/jphystheor-appl.v1i1.4706
17. Han, J., Bao, L., Chen, L., Cai, T., Pi, Y., Zhou, S., Tu, Y., & Koenig, K. (2015). Dividing the force concept inventory into two equivalent half-length tests. Physical Review Special Topics - Physics Education Research, 11(010), 1121-9. doi.10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.11.010112
18. Hestenes, D. (1998). Who needs physics education research? American Journal of Physics, 66, 465-467. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18898
19. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141-166. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2343497
20. Hughes, S., Kaplan, R., & Lyddy, F. (2013). The impact of language and response format on student endorsement of psychological misconceptions. Teaching of Psychology, 40(1), 31-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628312465861
21. Jamaludin, R., & Osman, S. Z. (2014). The use of a flipped classroom to enhance engagement and promote active learning. Journal of Education and Practice, 5(2), 124-131. Retrieved from http://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JEP/article/view/10648.
22. Khe Foon H. &Chung Kwan LO (2018). Flipped classroom improves student learning in health professions education: a meta-analysis. BioMedical Education, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-018-1144-z
23. Krueger, R. A. (1994). Focus groups: the practical guide goes applied research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
24. Krueger, R. A. (2002). “Analysis: systematic analysis process.” Website. Retrieved from https:// www.tc.umn.edu/~rkrueger/focus_analysis.html.
25. Lasry, N., Rosenfield, S., Dedic, H., Dahan, E., & Reshet, O. (2011). The puzzling reliability of the force concept inventory. American Journal of Physics, 79 (9), 909-912. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/204471908.pdf
26. Mandrikas, A., Skordoulis, C., & Halkia, K. (2013). Pre-service elementary teachers’ conceptions about wind. International Journal of Science Education, 35(11), 1902-1924. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.706374
27. Martin-Blas, T., Seidel, L., & Serrano-Fernandez, A. (2010). Enhancing force concept inventory diagnostics to identify dominant misconceptions in first-year engineering physics. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(6), 597-606. Doi. 10.1080/03043797.2010.497552
28. McGrath, C., Guerin, B., Harte, E., Frearson, M., & Manville, C. (2015). Learning gain in higher education (1st ed., p. 7). Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved June 15, 2017, from https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR996.html
29. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Understanding conceptual change: A commentary. In M. Limón & L. Mason (Eds.). Reconsidering Conceptual Change: Issues in Theory and Practice (pp. 101-111). Amsterdam: Kluwer.
30. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. http://one2oneheights.pbworks.com/f/MISHRA_PUNYA.pdf
31. Morrison, J.A., & Lederman, N.G. (2003). Science teachers’ diagnosis and understanding of students’ preconceptions. Science Education, 87, 849-867. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sce.10092
32. Onwu, G., & Stoffel, N. (2005). Instructional functions in large, under-resourced science classes: Perspectives of South African teachers. Perspectives in Education, 23(3), 79-91. http://hdl.handle.net/2263/3820
33. Persson, J. R. (2015). Evaluating the Force Concept Inventory for different student groups at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.06099.
34. Roe, B., & Doll, H. (2000). Prevalence of urinary incontinence and its relationship with health status. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 9, 178-188. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2702.2000.00346.x
35. Rollnick, M., & Davidowitz, B. (2015). Topic-specific PCK of subject matter specialists in Grade 12 organic chemistry. In D. Huillet (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Southern African Association for Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (pp. 243-250). Eduardo Mondlane University, Maputo: SAARMSTE.
36. Sands, D., Parker, M., Hedgel, H., Jordan, S. & Gallowa, R. (2018). Using concept inventories to measure understanding. Higher Education Pedagogies, 3(1), 60–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/23752696.2018.1433546
37. Savinainen, A., & Viiri, J. (2014). The force concept inventory as a measure of students’ conceptual coherence. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(4), 719-740. doi 10.1007/s10763-007-9103-x
38. Scott, T. F., & Schumayer, D. (2018). Central distractors in Force Concept Inventory data. Physical review physics education research, 14(010106), 1-11. https://journals.aps.org/prper/pdf/10.1103/ PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010106
39. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational researcher, 15(2), 4-14Spaull, N. (2013a). Poverty and privilege: primary school inequality in South Africa. International Journal of Educational Development, 33(5), 436-447. file:///C:/ /Downloads/wp-13-2012.pdf
40. Sutton, P.S., & Knuth, R. (2017). A schoolwide investment in problem-based learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 99(2), 65-70.
41. Spaull, N. (2013b). South Africa’s education crisis: the quality of education in South Africa 1994-2011. A report commissioned by CDE Retrieved from http://www.section27.org. za/wp-/uploads/2013/10/Spaull-2013-CDE-report-South-Africas-Education-Crisis.pdf
42. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. (1992). Mental models of the earth: a study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535-585.
43. White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. Great Britain: Falmer Press.
44. Williams D E. (2016). The future of medical education: flipping the classroom and education technology. Ochsner Journal.16(1):14-5.
45. Williams, J. D. (2009). Belief versus acceptance: why do people believe in evolution? BioEssays, 31, 1255-1262.
46. Wiser, M., & Amin, T. (2001). “Is heat hot?” Inducing conceptual change by integrating everyday and scientific perspectives on thermal phenomena. Learning and Instruction, 11, 331-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(00)00036-0
47. Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics: an introductory analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Harper and Row.
48. Zakiyah, I., Widodo, W., & Tukiran, T. (2019). Implementation of Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) Strategy to Reduce Misconception in Thermochemistry. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Studies, 1(7), 754-759. https://doi.org/10.29103/ijevs.v1i7.1757
49. Zirbel, E. L. (2004). Framework for conceptual change. Astronomy Education Review, 1(3), 62-76. https://access.portico.org/stable?au=pgg3ztf7r1q